

TiUe. 



.E_S8± 



Qass 
Book-#-S 

,^8 



Imprint 



M— «oeo»-i ««»o 



SPEECH 



^. BUCHANAN, OF PENNSYLVANIA, 



i.v scrroRT of 



Mti. BENTON'S RESOLUTIONS, 



KESPKCTiXfJ TH* 



FORTIFICATIONS AND DEFENCE OF THE COUNTRFi/ 



IN SENATE, FEBRUARY 1 & 2 1836. 



WASHINGTON : 

L A IF. t K I V E K, [(.IS '1 l; 






SPEECH. 



SPEECH OF MR. BUCHANAN, 
Ok Pennsylvania. 

/n Smote, February 1 and 2 — On Mr. Benton's 
resolutions, ;is modified by the mover on tlie 
suggestion of Mr. Grundy, for ai=ttinp; apart so 
much of tlie surphis revenie as may be neces- 
sary for the defence and pei manenl SiiCurity of 
the country. 

Mr. PRtsiDitsT: I am much better pleased with 
the first resolution oftercd by ihe Senator from 
Missouri (Mr. Uenion) since he hau modified it upon 
the suggestion of the Senator from Tennsse (Mr. 
Grundy.) When individuals have more money 
than they know how to expend, th y ofien squan- 
der it foolishly. The rtniark applies, perhaps, 
with stUl greater force to uitions. Wlun our 
TreaMiry is werflowing. Congress, who are but 
mere trustees for the people, ought to be especisl- 
ly on their guard again-tt wasteful expenditures of 
the public money. Tlie surplus can be applied 
to some good and UHeful purpose. I am willing 
to grant ail that may be necessavy for the public 
defence: but no mort». I am therefore pleased tliat 
the resolution lius assumed its present form. 

The inie quotion involvtd in this dijcussion i»-, 
on whom o«,t;ht the responsib lily to rest for hav- 
ing adjourned on the 3(1 of March lubt without 
providing for the defence r>f the country. There 
can be no doubt a fearful responsibility rests 
somewhere. For my own part, I should have 
been willing to leave the decision of this question I 
to our constituent!^. 1 am a man of yieaee; and 
dislike the criminitiwn and recrimination which 
this discusaion mtist necessarily jjroducc. Hut iti 
l-^ vain to rcg"."et wh'U c:\niiOt now be avoided. — | 
The friends of tliT'Auininisiration have been at-j 
tacked; and we must now defend ourselves. I 
deem it nece**^r} , therefore, to state the reasons 
vrhy I voted, on the third of March la.st, in favor | 
of the appropriation of three millions for the de- j 
fence of tlie country, and why I glory in that 
vote. 

The languages u»ed by Senators in reference to ! 
this appropriation has been very strong. It has I 
b^n denounced as a violation of the Coiutitu- 1 
lion. It has been decl-«red to be such a mea.sure j 
as would not h*ve rect ived the support of the mi- 
nority, had they believed it could prevail, and i 
they wwikl be lield responsible for il. It hasi 
been stigmatized as mostmiusual — most astonish- 1 
ing — most surprising. And finally, to rap the 
climax, it has been procUimed tiiat tlie pasfinge 
of such an approprittion would be virtually to; 
create a dictator, and to surrender the power of! 
»he purse and the sword into the hands of the 
President. 



I vote<l for that appropriation under the high- 
est convictions of public duty, and I now intend 
to defetid my vote against all these charges. 

In examining the circumstances which noi only 
jusiified ti.is appropiiation, but tendered it abso- 
lutely necessary, 1 am forced into the discussion 
of the French question. We have been tokl, that 
if we should go to war with Fr^mce, we are the 
authors of that war. The Senator from New 
Jersey (Mr. Southard,) has declared that it will be 
produced by the boastful vanity of one man, the 
petulance of anotiier, and the fitful violence of a 
third. It would not be difficult to conjecture who 
are the inJividu ils to whom the Senator alludes. 

He has also informed us, that in the evenf of 
sucli a war, the guilt which must rest somewhere 
will be tremendous. 

Now, sir, I shall undertake to prove, tlut 
scaicei)' an example* exists iii history of a power- 
ful and independent nation having snfiered such 
wrongs and indignities as we have done from 
France, wi'h so much patience and ibrbearanro. 
If France should now resort to arms, — if our tie- 
fenceless seacoast should be phindered, — if the 
blood of our citizens should Lc shed, — the re- 
sponsibility of the Senate, to use the langua-^e of 
the gentleman, vt ill be tremendous. I ehall not 
follow the example of the Senator, and i»ay, their 
guilt; — because tiiat would be to altr;!)ute to tlieni 
an evil intention, which I believe did not exist. 

In discus'ii g this subject, 1 shall fi: it present to 
the view of the Senate the precin' attitude of the 
two Tiati(,ns towards e:(ch other, wh^-n t!;e ap- 
propriation of three millions was refused, and 
thfcn examine the rr-.isoi IS whicii have been iirgi-d 
to jintify t'lis refusal. Afttr having done so, I 
shall exhibit our relations with France as thev ex- 
ist at the present moment, for the. purpose of 
proving that we ought now to adopt tite revolti- 
tions of tht- gentleman from Missouri, aud grant 
all neeessarj- appropriations for tite riefence of tlK: 
country. 

In discassing this subject, it i^ not tny intenton 
to follow the fortification bill eitlHT into the. 
chamber of the committee of conference, or into 
the. hall of the House of Representatrver,. It is 
not my purpose to explain theconfuiion which tiier. 
existed, and which always mu.s'. Kxist after mid- 
night, on the last evening of the se-i^iion. I shall 
contend that the Senate ought to Iiiitc voted the 
three millions; that the fortitici'ion bill ought to 
have passed the Senate with tliu amciidtisent; at;d 
that, therefore, the Senate is roponsible not onlv 
for the loss of this appropriolion, but for that of 
the entire bill. 

What then was the attitude in which we stood 
towards France at the moment whvu the Senate 



rejected this approprication for the defence of the! I was then beyond the sphere of p&rty influence 
country? What, at that moment, was known, or and felt only as an American citizen. 



oughi to have been known, in regard to this ques- 
tion by every Senator on this floor? 

The ji'jf^'T. nf our claims v.p'jn Franre i-.re mw 
adii.iTted by all mankisid. Our generosity was 
e([ijal to their jus', ice. When she was crushed in 
the dust by Europe in anns — when her citic-s were 
g.irrisuned by a f jreign foe— when her indej^,en- 
dence was trampled under foot, we refused to 
urji^:: our chiims. This was due to our ancient 
.'illy. It w.;\E dise to oar grate^iil remembrance 
«jf the d-ivs of other }ears. The testimony of 
T.afayette conclusively establish^ s (his fact. In 
iiie Chamber of Deputies, on the lolh June, 1833, 
he clecl.red that we had retiised to uKite with the 
enfmi.s of France in iirgir.g- our chiims in 1814 
:i!id I8i5; and t'tat, if we Jiad done so, these claims 
would then have been settle'!. This circumstance 
will constitute one ot the brightest pages of our 
liistory. 

Waii the sum secured to our injured fellow- 
citiy.ens ijy the treaty of the 4th July, 1831, more 
than they had a ri^ht to demand.' Let the r.-poit 
of our Commit tee on Foieiyn delations, at the last 
session, answer this question. Th.y concur en- 
tire'ywiih the President, in the statement he had 
rjiadc in his .nessago, tliat it was absclut.l/ cer- 
tain the indemnity fell far short of the actual 
ajnount of our just claims, independently of da- 
mages and ictercbt for the d^tentiun; :uid that it 
v/i'.s well known at the time that in this respect, 
the settlement involved a sacrifice. But there is 
isow no longer room for any conjecture or doubt 
upon this subject. The commissioners under the 
rrea'y have closed ther laoors. From the very 
nature nf tlieir constitution, it bec?.me the interest 
of every claimant to reduce the othT claims as 
■miicii as possible, so th-tt his own dividend might 
thus he increased. After a hiborious and patient 
investigaton, the cla-ms which have been allowed 
by ihe cammissii^rs amount to $9,352,193 47. 
Vy.izh claimant will receive but little more than 
iialf i:i'i j'iiiH-ipal at the end of a qu.arter of acen- 
iury uiu:- h/.iug ail the interest. 

"^Vhy tiiiu '.las this treaty remained without ex- 
?c;iti3ir on the part of France, untd this day? Our 
Committee of Foreign Relations, at the last ses- 
sion, declared their conviction that the King of 
Prance "had invariably, on all suitable occasions, 
manifested an anxious deinrc, faithfully and ho- 
ncatiy, to fulli! tli- engagements contraced undt r 
iiis authority and in his name." They say, that 
'* !he oppositi-.^a to the execution of the treaty, 
and the payment of our just claims, does not 
pvoct-'ed from the King's Goi^ernment, hut from a 
^najority in the Chamber of Deputies." 

I'.'dvv, sir, it is my purpo:5e to contest this opin- 
ion, a'-.d to show, as I think I can conclusively, 
that i*- is not si just inference from the facts. 

Ar.u here, to prevent all possible misconstruc- 
tion, either on Ijiis side, or on the other side of the 
Atlasitic, if by any accident my humble remarks 
shou'd i:ver travel to such a distance, j)ermit me 
to say that I am solely responsible for ttiem my- 
jjelf. These opinions were in- p. great degree 
foriiicd v^hilsti w,\s in a for..ign land, and werei 



Is it not then manifest, to use t!»e language oi" 
Mr. Livingsion in h.is note to the Co'.mt de Rigny 
ofthc 3dA'.;gu?'-, 1834, I'^at the Fre-'ch Govern- 
ment have never appreciated the importance of 
tiie subject at it^ just value' There ar« two 
modes in which tht King could have manifested 
this anxious dekire faithfully to fulfil the treaty. 
These are by vvonls and by ac'ioj.s When a 
man's words and his a'ctions correspond you have 
the hightest evid- nee of his S!riCi.;iity. Even thoi 
le may he a 113'pocritein the <^yes of that Being 
oefore whom the fountains of human >ction are 
unveiled. But when a man's words and his ac- 
tions are at variance, — when he promises and 
d>;es not perform or even attempt t:< perform, — 
v/hen "he speaks the word of prom'se to the ear 
and breaks it to the hone" — the whiyie world will 
at once pronounce him insincere^ If this betrae in 
the transactions of common life, with h)w much 
mo; e force does it apply to tUa iniercourse be- 
tween di:domatisfs'' The de eit.'uiness of diplo- 
mucy has become almost aproveib. In Etirope 
the talent of over-reac!iing gives a Minister the 
glory of diplomatic skill. The Frcich .school 
has been distinguished in this art. To prove it, I 
need onlj- mention the name of Talleyrand. The 
American school teaches far diff.;rent lessons. 
On this our suecess has, in a g^eat d( gree, de- 
pended. The skilful diidomatists of Europe are 
f.-;i!ed by the dov/nright honesty and drectness 
of purpose which have characterized ail our ne- 
j gctiations. 

Even the established forms of diplomacy con- 
tain much unmeaning- language, v/lnch is perfectly 
understood by everybody, and deceives nobody,. 
Ii"«ninisters have avowed then- sincerity, and their 
ardent desire to execute the treaty; to deny them, 
on our p«t, would be insulting, and might lead to 
the most unpleasant consequences. Jn forming 
an estimate of their inleniions, ther. fore, every 
wi.-e man will regard their actions, rather ih.an 
their words. By their deeds shtdl they be known. 
Let us then ttst the French Government by this 
touchstone of truth. 

'I'he ratifications of liie treaty of the 4th July, 
1831, were exchanged at Washington, on the 2d 
February, 1832. When this treaty arrived in Paris, 
the French t;hambers were in stssioo, and they 
continued in session for several week:^. They did 
not adjourn, until the 19;h of Apil!. No time 
more propitious for presenting this treaty to the 
Chambers, could have been selected, than that 
very moment. Europe then was, as I believe it 
still is, one vast magaxine of gunpowder. It wife 
generally believed, that the Folisii revolution was 
tire spark which would produce the explosion. 
There was imminent dang-er of a continental war, 
in which France, to preserve her ex stance, would 
have to put forth all her energies. Russia, Pru.s- 
sia, and Austria, were arined and reudy for the 
battle. It was then the clear policy of France to 
be at' a good understan ling with the United States. 
If it had been the ardent desire of the King-'s Go- 
vernment, to carry into tflect the stipulations of 
the treaty, they would have presented it to tiie 



there freely expressed upon all suitable occasJon.s. Chambers bci'bre their adjourn.Tient. This xyould 



undoiibted'y have been the course pursued by any 
Preside lit of the United StUea, umler hifnilar cir- 
cunxstmces Tiut tbe treat)' \v.<s not presented- 

I freely adT»it, tliat this cmiss'on, standing by 
itself, mifj'it be explained by the ne-ir approach of 
Xhii adjoiirnmsnt, at ih- tine the tn-aty arrive I 
from Wasiii. ,5l"n. It is one important link, hov* 
ever, in tlie chain of circumjtaiices, wliich cannot 
be omttit d 

Tlie Government of the United States proc; eded 
immediatrly to exfcute their part of tlie trc.ty. 
By the act of the ISthJnly, 1832, the duties on 
French wines were ri»ducfd accordin:? to i's 
terms, to take eflect from the day of tlie cxclian^e 
of rat;fic.;ttit)jis- At the same sosiion, the (JongTess 
of the Un ted States, impelled, no doubt, hy ilieir 
kiniily feeling's towards France, which h;ul brrcii 
roused into actii^n by wluit tliey believed to be » 
final a ul cquitible setllcirunt of all our disputes, 
voluntarily r ducfd ihe duty upon silks comint; 
from this fci le of the Cape of GiO 1 Hope, to five 
per cent , Avliilr-t those tr^ni bejond v/trc fixed at 
ten per cmt. And at the next session, on the 2d of 
March, IS^o, this duty offive per cent, was taken 
off altojjeihe-; and ever since, French silks have 
been admi'i^d into our country free of duly. 
There is now, in fact, a discriminalirig- duty often 
per cent, in dieir favor, over silks [Vom I.wund 
the Cape of Good Hope. 

"What has France gained i.i 

duties on her v^ ines and her sjIIl-, \v1i;c1) blie would 
otherwise have b 'tn bound to pay? 1 have called 
upon the Si crttary of thr Tre.isun , for the pur- 
pose of a^ce't;.ining the amount. 1 now hold in 
my liHnd a uibular state mei;t, prepared a! my re- 
quest, which shows, that had t'"- duties remuintd 
what they '.ver<-, at the date of tiie ratification of 
the treaty, these urUcles, since that thne, would 
have piid into the TrenSiiry, on the 30th Sepi em- 
ber, 1S34, t!'e sum of jf3,C-61,525. Judg-'n;^- f oni 
the lar^e importations wliicli tiave since bei ji 
m.ade, I fed no lcesii.ati<>n in declu-ing it ;',s my opi- 
nion, th:it, at the present moment, ih se duties 
would smount to more t'lan the whole indmnity 
which Fiance ha-! enjjij^ed to pay to cur follow- 
citizens. Mefore the conc'usion of the I. n year:< 
mentioned in the treaty, sht- will have been freed 
from t)ve p<ymentof duies to an amount consi- 
derably above i wvlve m'll'ons ofdollHr-s, 

r>y the SMme act ofthe 13th July, 1832, a Board 
of Comnii-^ioncrs was established to recfive, cx- 
anaine, viiid decide the clairns of our citizens under 
.the treaty, v ho wert; to meet on the first d ly of 
the following Ausruat. Thiiact also directed ihe 
Secretary ofthe Treasurj- o cuise the several in- 
.stalments, with the interest thereon, p.ayable to 
the United Stat s in virtiiC'of the conviulion, to 
be received ♦rum thf^ French G.vernment and 
transferred to the United Stated in sjch manner 
as he may deem be.st. In this r. .sp^ ct the provi- 
sions of ihf act cnrrespond with tlie terms ofthe 
treaty, whi^h prescribe ihat the mcney shall be 
paid into the hands of such person or pf-r-ons as 
shall be autlioized to receive it by the Govern 
inent of the Unitr d Stntcs. 

Were the French Government immediately in 
formed of :dl these procted'ngs? Who can doubt 
it? Cerainly no one at all acquainted with ti.e 
vigilance and zeal of their diplomatic agents. 



The 19th of Nov;.. :._•, .,,.„., ...^ ....■ l\>i- the 
meedi'g of the Chambers, at length arrived. •- 
i-'.Miry AiTiencan wa* ;ii'\ious to 1 :it,v v.-'iat il.o 
King would say in his speech concerning the t e ■.- 
ly. No one could doubt b'.U that J,e woul 1 
.stronj^'ly r. conmeni to die Chambers to mti^n; 
the .ipi)r<>pr;ation oft- en'y-five millions of franks, 
l!ie first instlment of which would become due on 
the second of February following. All, however, 
Mdiich ^ the speech contiiins in i-ehuif u to the 
treaty is compri.sed in the f dio xing sentences;— 
" I have also ordered my ministers to comniuiii- 
cate to you the tcaty conclmled on the 4th .Iu!v, 
1811, between rty Government ar\d that of th.- 
Unitf.d States of Americi. This arrangem<;iit 
puts an end to the nciprocal cluims of the two 
countries." Now, sir. I airi well aware of ih.- 
brevity and non-commit'rd char.icler of Kini^'s 
spe^'clies in F.urope. I know tht; n'; ceosity whicli 
exists th;:re for circumspection and caution. But 
nriakingf. very-fair allowance fir th;se considera- 
ti)h'3, I may at least ."-ay, that the speech does not 
manifest an anxious desire to carry the treaty into 
tflfect. What might the King have said; wh;it 
ought he to h-tve said; what wotdd he have said 
had he felt 'his anxi-us desire' V m'ght all have 
been embraced in a single additional .•sentence-, 
snch as the fullo-.vin:;: "The Congress of ll>o 
United Slates luve already provided for the ad- 
mission of French wines into th; ir ports upon th^r 
terms of this treat\', and have voluiitHfilv reduced 
their duties uf;on French s !ks; I mu.st, therefore, 
requ' St vou to grant me the means < f disch.arging 
the finst insta'ment whidi wiil become die, under- 
this treaty, on the second day of February next." 
The King did not even ask the Chambers for t! = 
money necessiry to red em the fi.ith of Fnnce. !n 
this respect he debt due to the United Slates i> 
placed In striking contrast to the (;reek loan. — 
immediately after ihetwosi-n^ncc.s<,f thespeecli, 
winch I have already qtot-d, the King proceeds: 
" YftU wdl likewise be call, d to examine the trea- 
ty by *hic!i Prince Oiho of Bavaria in caded to 
the throne of Greece. /.■,/)«// have to request fr.un. 
yiu the means tif i;ticrantu'ins;, in ttt} /m v:rth ;?.••/ 
ff///fs, a liun which is indispe'isnble for the cUu- 
bliskment of the new h>tule Juundcl ht/ our carcf 
and ciincuT^ence." 

The establ'shment of the new Sta'e founded by 
our cares and concurr nee! Ti issi.i, sir, lias 
made greater advances by h- r skill in dip'omacv 
than by her vast physic:d power. Unhss I .-.j-i 
much mistaken, tlie creation of this new s'ate, 
with Prince Qtho as its Kin/, will ac oinplsli the 
very object which it w s the int-rcst and piir- 
pos; of France to defeit. It will, in the end, 
virtua ly convert Gi;e;cetntoa Rus-ian provin<e. 
I cou'.d sny vniich more on'the subjt ct, but ! f /r- 
hcaf. Mv pre.sent purpose is mer ly to present 
in a striking view, the difference between the 
King's I .n.t:iv»,e;e in re'aiun u. our treaty, and that 
treaty uhic'i placrvi the son ofthe Kii'g of Biiva- 
ria on the thione of Greece. 

Time pa';sed away, and the 2d I'ebi-nary, IS.'J, 
the dav when the first instalment under the treaty 
becami" die, arrived. It was to he paid ''into 
the hands of ^uch pe'son or persons as shall bo 
authorized by the G ivi-rnment of the United 
States to receive it" Tiie money on that d.iy 



ought to hare been ready at Paris. But strang-e, 
but most wonderful as it may appear, although the 
Chambers had been in session from the 19lh of 

llrrc-ilc: ur.til the 2d of February, the King's 
Government h (d never even presented the treaty 
to the Chambers, — had never even asked them 
for a grant of the money necessary to fulfil its 
engage rac;n's. Well might Mr. Livingston say, 
that they had never properly appreciated the im- 
portance of the subjec-t. 

The Government of the United States, knowing 
thit the Kin.!,^ in his spee- h had promised te pre- 
sent the treaty to the Chambers, and kno ring that 
they ii:id been in session since Noveitiber, mijrht 
have taken means to demand the firs' instalmt ntat 
Paris en the 2d d ly of Febt-uary. Sfrictly speak- 
ing, it was their duty to do so, acting as trustees 
for the claimants. Rut they did not dr >w a bill 
of exciiange ai Washing-ton for tlie first instal- 
ment, until five days after it had become due at 
Paris. This bdl was not presented to the French 
Government for payment until the 23d Maich, 
183:3. Even at that day, the French Ministry 
had not presented either the treaty, or a bill to 
crry it into effect, to the Chambers. The faith 
of France was thus violated by the neglect of 
the K ng's Government, long before any bill was 
presented. They, and not the Chambers, are 
responsible for this violation. It was even im- 
possible for the Chambers to prevent it. Had 
this treaty and bill been hid before them in time 
to have enabled them to redeem the faith of 
France, the loyalty of the French character 
would never have pern^itted them to be ffuilty of 
a positive violation nf national honor. The faith 
of the nation was forfeited before they were 
called upon to act. The responsibility was vo- 
luntarily assumed by the King s ministers. The 
Chamb rs are dear of it. Besides, the Minis'ry 
were all powerful with the Chambers during that 
session. They carried every thing they urged. 
Kven the bill providing the means of guaranteeing 
the Greek h)an, became a law. Can it then for a 
single moment be believed, that it a bill to carrv 
into effect our treaty — a treaty securing such im- 
portant advantages to France —had been"^presente i 
at an early p riod of the session, and had been 
pressed by the Ministry, that they would have 
fdled in the aitempti" At all evpi:ts, it was their 
imperative duty to pursue this course. The as- 
pect of the political horizon in Europe was still 
lowering. There was still imminent dan«,'-er of a 
general war. Fr?.nce was still in a position to 
make her dread any serious misunderstanding 
with the United StUes. 

Afier all this, on the 26th March, the Dude de 
Broglie, in a note to Mr. Niles, our Charge d'Af 
faires at Paris, stated that it w«s " a source of re- 
gret, and indeed, of asionishm nt, that the Gov- 
ernment of the United States did not think proper 
to have an understanding with that of Frarice, be- 
fore taking this step." What step? The demand 
of an honest debt, almost two months after it had 
been due, under a solemn treity. Indeed, the 
Duke, judging from the tone of his note, appears 
almost to havo considered the demand an insult. 
To make a positive engagement to pay a fixed siira 
on a particular day, and when that sum is demand- 



nicated their apprehensions to this Goremmcnt, 
and asked it to suspend the demand of the 
money. But they had never whispered such a 
suspicion, after the exchange of the ratifications of 
the t;eaty; and the first intimation of it on this side 
^of the Atlantic, was siccompanicd by the astound- 
ing fact that the French Government had dishonor- 
ed our bill. It is true, that before the treaty wa« 
signed, they hid expressed some apprehensions to 
Mr. Rives on this subject. These, it would seem, 
from their subsequent conduct, were merely diplo- 
matic, and intended to produce delay; because, 
from the date of the treaty, on the 4th July, 1831, 
until after our bill of exchiinge was dishonored, in 
March, 1833, no intimation of danger from that 
quarter was ever suggested. These circumstance* 
ed nearly two months after, to express astonish- 
ment to the creditoi', would, in private life, becoH- 
sldered trifling and evasive. 

The excuse made by the French Ministry for 
their conduct, is altogethir vain. Had they dread- 
ed the vote of the Chambers — had they been afraid 
to appear before them with their treaty and their 
bill, they would, and they ought to have commu- 
made a great noise throughout Europe, and soon 
became the subject of general remark. 

On the 6th of April, 1833, a year and more than 
two months after the exchange of the ratifications 
at Washington, the treaty and bill were first pre- 
sented to the French Chambers. The session 
closed on the 25th of April, without any further 
action upon the subject. No attempt was made by 
the Ministry to press it; and as the session would 
terminate so soon, perhaps no attempt ought to 
have been made. But, as a new session was to 
commence the day after the termination of the old„ 
and to continue two months, a favorable opportu- 
nity was thus presented to urge the passage of the 
Uw upon the Chambers. Was this done? No sir. 
The ministry still continued to pursue the same 
course. They sufl'ered the remainder of the month 
of April to pass, the month of May to pass, and not 
until the eleventh of June, <^nly fifteen days before 
the close of the session, did they again present the 
bill to carry into efl^ect the treaty. It was referred 
10 a committee, of which Mr. Benjamin Delessert 
was the Chairman. On the 18th of June, he made 
a report. This report contains a severe reprimand 
of the French Government for not having present- 
ed the bill at an earlier period of the session; and 
expresses th6 hope that the treaty may be commu- 
nicated at the opening of the next session. If we 
are to judge of the opinion of the Chamber from 
the tone and character of this report, instead of 
being hostile to the execution of the treaty, had it 
been presented to them in proper time, they felt 
every disposition to regard it in a favorable light 
I shall read the whole report — it is very short, and 
is as follows: 

"Gentlemen: The Committee charged by you, 
to examine the bill relative to the treaty, concluded 
on the 4th of July, 1831, between France and the 
United States, his demanded a number of docu- 
ments and reports, which must be examined, in 
order to obtain a complete knowledge of so im- 
portant a transaction. 

"The committee was soon convinced, that a con- 
scientious examination of these papers, woiild re- 



quire much time; find that, at so advanced a penod 
of the seesion, its labors would have no definitive 
result. It rej^reti, that from motives which the 
Government only can explain, the bill was not pre- 
sented earlier to the Chamber for discussion. It 
regrets this so much the more, as it it convinced of 
the importance of the treaty, which essentially in- 
terests our maritime commerce, our agriculture, 
aiid our manufactures. 

•'Several chambers of commerce, particularly 
those of Paris and Lyons, have manifested an ar- 
dent desire that the business should be speedily 
terminated. 

'•The committee would be satisfied if, after a 
deeper study of the question, it could enlighten 



States, under similar circumstances, had withheld 
a treaty from Congress requiring ah appropriation 
for fourteen months after it had been duly rati- 
fied, and had thus forfeited the national faiih to a 
foreign Government, what would have been the 
consecjuence? Sir, he ought to have been, be 
would have been impeached. No circumstances 
could ever hive justified such conduct in the eyes 
of the American Congress or the American Peo- 
ple. 

After all the provocation which the President 
had received, as the Kejiresentative of his coun- 
try, what was his conduct.' It might have been 
supposed that this violent man, as the Senitor 
from New Jersey (Mr. Southard) has designated 



the Chamber with regard to the justice of the him, would at once have recommended decisive 



claims alleged by each of the parties to the treaty, 
and which form the basis of it; bwt as time does 
not allow a definitive report to be made on the 
subject, it considers itself as the organ of the 
Chamber, in expressing the wish that this treaty 
be communicated, at the opening of the next ses- 
sion; and that its result may be such, as to strength- 
en the bonds of friendship, which must ever exist 
between two nations so long united by common 
interest and sympathy." 

After a careful reeview of this whole transac- 
tion, I am convinced that the Government of France 
never would have pursued such a course towards 
us, had they entertained a jusr sense of our power, 
and our willingness to exert it in bciiulf of our in- 
jured fellow citizens. Had Russia or Austria been 
her creditors, in^tsad of ourselves, the debt would 
have been paid when it became due; or at the least, 
the Ministers of the King would have exerted them- 



measures. Judging from his energy, — from his 
well known devotion to the interests of his coun- 
try, — and above all, from his f.imoas dcol:tration 
to ask notliing from foreign nations but what 
was right, and to submit to nothing wrong, I 
should have expected from him an indignant mes- 
sage at the commencement of the next session of 
Congress. Instead of that, the message of De- 
cember, 1833, in relation to French affairs, is of 
the mildest.character. It breathes a spirit of con- 
fident hope that our ancient ally would do us jus- 
tice during the ne.\t session of the Chambers. 
His exposition of this subject is concluded by the 
following declaration: 

'• As this subject involves important interests, 
and has attracted a considerable share of the pub- 
lic attention, I have deemed it proper to make this 
explicit statement of its aclu.d condition; and 
should I be disappointed in the hope now enter- 



telvcs, in a far different manner, toobtain tiie neces- nained, the subject will be again brought to the 



sary appropriation from the Chambers. I am again 
constrained, however reluctantly, to adopt the 
opinion which 1 had formed at the moment. Our 



totice of Congress in such a m inner as the occa- 
sion may require." 

And thus ends the first act of this astonishing 



fierce political strife in this country is not under- 1 hi *torical drama. Throiighoutthe wholeofit, begin- 
stood in Europe; and least of all, perhaps, in I ning, middle, and end, the French Govcrnmint, 
France. During the autiunn of 1832, and the | and not the French (.'hambers, were exclusively 
session of 1832, '3, it was believed abroad that we to blame. 



were on the very eve of a revolution; that our 
glorious Union was at the point of dissolution. I 
speak, sir, from actual knowledge. Whilst the 
advocates of despotism were looking forward, with 
eager hope, to see the last free republic blotted 
out from the face of nations, the friends of free- 
dom throughout the world were disheartened, and 
drea led tiie result of our experiment. The storm 
did rage in thiscoun'ry with the utmost violence 



We have now arrived at the mission of Mr. 
Livingston. He reached Paris in September, 
1833. The Duke de Broglie assured him "that 
the King's Government would willingly and with- 
out hesitation promise to direct the deliberations 
of the Chambers to the projtt de hi relative to the 
execution of the convention of July 4, 1831, on 
the day after the Chamber is constituted, and to 
employ every means to secure the happy condu- 



it is no wonder thnt tluisc friends of liberty, onision of an affair, the final determination of which 
the other side of the Atlantic, who did not I the United States cannot desre more ardently 
know how to appreciate the recuperative ener- than ourselves." After this assurance, and iiflter 
gies of a free and eidiglittned people, govern- all that had passed, it was confidently expected 
ed by Federal and State institutions of their own j that the King would, in strong terms, have re- 
choice, should have been alarmed for the safety of j commended the adoption of the appropriation by 
the Kepublic. For myselT 1 can say that I never I the Chambers. In this we were again doomed to 
felt any ssrious apprehension; yet the thrill of de- disappointment. In his opening speech he made 
light with which I received the news of the pas- no direct allusion to the subject He simply says, 
sage of the famous compromise law of March, th.at "the financial laws, and those required for 
1833, can never be effaced from my memory. I the execution of treaties, will be presented to 
did not then stop to inquire into the nature of its I you." 

provisions. It was enough for me to know that The bill wns presented, and debated, and final- 

the Republic was safe, not only in my own opin- 'j rejected by the Chamber of Deputies on the 

ion, but in the opinion of the world. 1st day of April, 1834, by a vote of 176 to 168. 

Suppose, sir, that the President of the United jit is not my present purpose to dw«ll upon the 



causes of this rejection. No doubt the principal 
otie was that the French Mir.istcrs wtre s.ur 
prised Ecar the conclusio;! of the debate, and w^re 
unatde at the moment to show that the captures 
at St. Sebasliauj were not included in our treaty 
-with Spain. I am sorry they were not better 
prepared upon this point; but I altribute to them 
no bliime on that account. 

It has been urged over and over ag-ain, both 011 
this fioor and elsewhere, that tiie rejection of the 
treaty was occasioned by the publication in this 
country of aif. Rives'.-; letter to Mr. Livingston of 
the 8th of Juh'-, 1831. Is this the fact? If it be so it 
ought to be known to the woi Id. If it be not, both 
the character of this Government and oi' Mc- Rives 
should be rescued from the imputation. What is 
the opinion expressed in this letter.' Is it that the 
American claimants vrould obtain, under the trea- 
ty, mare than the simount of their just claims? No 
such thing. Is it that they would obtain the 
amount of their just claims v.^th interest? Not 
even this. The negotiator merely expresses the 
opinion that they would receive everv cent of the 
principa!. He does not ailege ti>:U' Ihey wcuW 
receive one cent of interest for a dplay of ne:^rly 
a quarter of a century. This opinion "is evidently 
tounacd vpon that expressed by Mr. Ga'la in 
m a despatch dated on the 14lh Januiirv, 18^2, 
cited by Mr. Rives, in which the f(;rmer evpnsses 
hisbelu'f tiiat five millions of dollars would satis- 
fy ad our just ckirr.s. It ou^ht to be observed 
o. n™'."^ stipulated to be paid by the treaty is on?y 
25,0lJu,0J0 of franks, or about §4,700.000; and 
taut more than nine years had elapsed between 
tne date of Mr. Gallatin's despatch and the signing 
of the treaty. These facts all appear on the face 
ot the fetter, with the additional fact that the 
statements of the claimants, which have from time 
to time been presented to Congress, carry the 
amou:4 of the claims much higheV. These 'state- 
ments, however, Mr. Hives did not believe were a 
safe guide. 

This is (he amount cf the letter, when r.ilrly 
analysed, which, it is alleged, destroyed the trea- 
ty before tlie French Cliambers. If a cripv of It 
had been placed in the hands of every Deputy, it 
could not possibly have produced any .such effect. 

That it did not occasion the rej.'jctson of the 
treaty is absolutely certain- 1 have'examined the 
whole debate for the purpose of d scoveiing any 
allusion to this letter; but I have examined it in 
vain. Not the slightest trace of the letter can be 
detected in any of the numerous speeches deliv- 
ered on that occasion. The topics of opposition 
were variotis, and several of them of a strano-e 
character; but the letter is not even once aUuded 
to tiiroughout the whole debate. If its existence 
were knovvn at the time in the French Chamber, 
this letter, written by a Minister to his own Gov- 
ernment, expressing a favorable opinion of the 
result of hi.s own negotiations, was a document of 
a character so natural, so much to be expected, 
that not one Deputy in opposition to the treaty 
believed it to be of sulTicient Importance even 10 
merit a passing notice. Still, I have often thought 
it strange it had never been meniioiied in the de- 
bate. The mystery i> now resolved. The truth j 
is, this letter, which is alleged to have produced 



such fatal effects, was entirely unknown to the 
niv m'-iers of the French Chamber v,h n tliey re- 
jected the tr. .Vcy. This fact is welt er.tablished 
by a letter from Mr. Jay, the chairman of the 
commiitce, appointed by the Chamber of Depu- 
ties to investigate our claims, addressed to Mr. 
Gbbe-s, and d^ted at Paris on the 24t!i January, 
1835. I shall resd it. 

Extract of a letter from Mr. Jay to Mr. Gibbes, 
dated 24//t Junicari/, 1835. 

♦* It is asserted in tiie American prints that the 
rejection of tlie American treaty by the Chamber 
of Deputies, at their last session, was chiefly ow- 
ing to th - publication of a letter from Mr. Rives 
to his own Government. This is an error, which 
justice to that distingui-shed statesman, and a sense 
of his unremitting exertions to promote the inter- 
ests of liis Government wliile here, induce rae 
formally to contradict. No such evidence ap- 
pears in the debates; and in none of my conver- 
s itions v/ith the menbers have I ever heard his 
letter alleged as the motive for disputing the 
amount due. I muc'i question, indeed, if any 
o'her Deputy than myself ever rearl the letter 
jjiuded to." 

We h ivo row arrived at that point of time when 
a mojoriy of the French Chamber arrayed them- 
selves against the treaty. This decision was 
made on the 1st April, 1834. Some apprehen- 
sions then prevailed among the King and his min- 
isters. Ti.e business was now becoming serious. 
New assurances had now become necessary to 
prevent the President from presenting the whole 
transaction to Congress, which they knew would 
stil! be in session, when the information of the re- 
jection would reach the United States. In his 
anynial message, at the commencement of the 
session, it will be recollected, he had declared 
that should he be disippointed in the hope then 
entertained, lie would again bring the subject before 
Congress, in such a manner as the occasion might 
require. They knew that he was a nvjn who per- 
formed his promises, and a great eflbrt w.is to be 
made to induce him to change his purpose. 

Accordingly a French brig of war, the Cuirassier, 
is fitted out with despatches to Mr. Sunurier. 
They reached him on the 3d June. On the 4tb, 
he has an in'erviev/ .with Mr. M'Lano, and makes 
explanations which the latter very properly re- 
quests may be reduced to v/riting. In c^^mpliance 
with this request, the French Minister, on 
the .5th addresses a note to Mr. M'Lan-:. After 
expressing the regrcJs of the French Government 
at the rejectiont of the bill, he uses the following 
language. " The King's Government, sir, after this 
rejection, the object of so much painful disap- 
pointment to both Governm;nts, has deliberated, 
and its unanimous determination bm been to make 
an appeal from the first vote of the present Cham- 
ber, to the next Choimber, and to .appeyr bf'fore the 
new legislature with its treaty and its bill in 
hand. 

"It flatters itself that the light already thrown 
upon this serious question, during tl'cse first de- 
bates, and the expression of the public wishes 
becoming each day more clear and distinct, and, 
finally, a more mature examination, will have, in 
the meaa time, modified the minds of persons, 



9 



a;i(l that its own conviction will become the con- 

viction of the Ji2 .ambers. 'I'l c Ki'is^'s (iovevn- 

n- out, r-ir, will r.ia^c every Joynl nnd r'uiTiitut'o!) .1 

'loit to '.hut <.-fr c', and nil! do' all that its p«^r- 

vcrinfj per.siiisi)n of tlie justice and of the mu- 

lal lulvAiilajj^es of" llie trcUy antliunzes you to 

sped from it. Its intention, nnoiv over, is to do 

1 that our con^Ututiin ul'ows, to hasten, as mitcli 

. . possible, the period of tlic iitw presentation of 

tiie rejecte I Ifiw. 

Such s'r, a"-* the ^nlimfnts, sucti tlie inten- 
tions of his M'jesy's (lovein-ncnt. 1 think I may 
rely that, on il* pa:t, the fiovcrnrjcnt oi the re- 
public will avoid, with fores'.^ein^ solicit.de, in 
tliis ti-ansifory state of thing?, all tha'. migl't hi-- 
come a caise of fresli irriuiion between tiic two 
countries, compromit tUe treaty, and ndse, up 
an obstacle pi-rh^ps insumiountahlr, to th- view^ 
of recoiiciiiation and harmop}' wh - the 

King's council." 

Now, sir, cxanr\^ine this letter, e\cn wliiiout any 
r>4erenre to tho answer of Mr. McLane, and can 
.r.fve be a doubt as to its true constnictioii? It 
■ as not mer<dy the disposition, but "it was the 
uttcn'l'in of the K'lis^'s Government to do a!! thnt 
tlieir iJonstitution allows; ta hasten, as much as 
iif ssible, the period of the new presentation of 
■ J rtrjected law." The Presi I' nt knew that un- 
' r the Constimtion of France the Kinp could ai 
!;y time fonvoke the Cbanibcrs upon three weeks 
1. )'.ioe. it was \n his power, therefore, to pre- 
sent t!iis hiwto the Chambers wlienever he thought 
proper. The promise was to hasten th's pre.'.en- 
t'Uioii as mush as po-sible. Without/ any tiling' 
turtjier the Presiden' had a ric^ht confidently to 
ivpect that the Chambers would be convoked in 
seison ioena>lc him to present th.ir decision to 
the C^'njjressofthe UnitsdStitesin his n-xt annual 
rnesMiije. The assiirauce was m.ide on the 5 h 
June, anri Congress did not assemble until the be- 
ginning of Dccenner. Bu'; the leit-rofMr. Mc- 
Lane, of th ■ 27tli .lune, removes all possib'e 
doubt from this suhjf ct. He informs Mr. Sfitrurier 
Ihat "the I'reNident is .still liuable to understand 
trie causes whirh led to the result of the prcceed- 
j^ in the CI amber, . especi^ly when he recol- 
':ted the assurances which had so often been 
. ide by the Kinj3^ and his ndnisters, of Ihrip ear- 
I St d'.sire to ctrryihe convention into tflect, 
I'ld the support wliich the Chamber had affiirded 
in all the other measures proposed by tiic King." 
And ugain: 

"The assurances which AI. Serurier's letter 
contains, of tl)e adherence of the King's Govern- 
ment to tbe treaty, of its unanimous dctcnniiiation 
tf) appeal from th..- decision of tjie pre-^ent to the 
.A- ChamScr, and Is conviction that the public 
. ish, aud a mature examiuaiioi of the suhjecf, 
will lead to a favorable re-nl% and its iMt'nti<in to 
make every cinsiifutional efl'ort to that efr< ct, and 
finally, its inleiii .n to do all th;it t'le (Jou^tilution 
allows to hasten the prcsentition of the new lav/, 
have all been fuU)' considered "y the Presidi-nt. 

"Tliouifh fully sensible of tite higli respoi.sibi- 
li'y which fie owes to the American peop'e, in a 
matter tou( hing so nearly t e national hono", tlie 
President, still trusting to the good faith and ju.s- 



lirc of i^rance, willing to ma'/ifest a sp:rir v,\ i< r- 
bearatice so long as it m.iy be consistent with the 
;:,^!;'S u\v\ di.L^.iity o'' \\'\z cor.tvy, and tv-.I.- d/,j.'v- 
ing to preserve those relations of frien^'slup which, 
C( mm: r.cing in O'lr s niggle for !ndeptn'''enee, 
fDrm the true poiicv of both nations, and sincere- 
ly rc^pccting Use King's vvi>h s, will rely upon 
llv; assurances whieli M Seriurier h .s b en ir.- 
structt d to oirer, and will therefiU'C awdt with 
cotifidcn^-cthe promised appeal to the new C'liam 
ber- 

"The Prej.i.'ent, in desiring the under.signtd to 
request that his sentlme-ds on this subject miy 
he made known tollis Mijesty'a Govcrnm' nt, 
has inslruc:ed him al-o to state his expectation 
Ihit the King, se< iiig the greit interests now in- 
volved in the subject, and tledeep so icitude felt 
by the people of the United State; respecting it, 
will enable ?iim, whe»i p'csenting th- .suhjr- t to 
Congress, as his duty will require liim to do at 
th.e opening of their nc\t session, to announce at 
that time the re-u't of tint appeal, and of His Ma- 
jf'st) 's eflorts for its; success " 

Had thi^ letter of Mr. M'Lane place ' a difT rent 
construction upoa the engagement of il)e French 
Government froni tiiat .wliieh Mr. Serruricr in- 
tended to communicate, it was his duty to make 
the necessary explana'ions without delay. He, in 
jthat c se, woulil have done so instaniiy. It was a 
subject of ti^o much importance to suffer any 
loii- pprehension to exist c'ncering it for a single 
moment. 

Notwithst mding all which had pas-cd, the Presi- 
dent, ou the faiib of ti<ese assurances of the French 
GovernmenT. suff;-rtd Cdngri:ss (fo adjourn witli- 
out prest nti g the subject to th-Jr view.* This 
rasi:, tids vio'eit man, instigated by his own good 
feelings towards our ancient ally, a:id by his love 
of peace, determines that he would try t-rem once 
mure, tliat he would once more extend tlu" olive 
b'anch before pftsenting to Co'igr; ss arid the na- 
tion ah^stor^ of our wrongs. I confess I do not 
■ pproveof this policy. 1 tiiiiik the time h.d then 
■'.rrived to manifest to France some s- nsibili y on 
our p .rt on accoun' of htr delay in cx;-cutiug the 
treaty. I belr;vethat such a course would have 
been dictated !iy sound poliey. 

Whit were the con^eqirenc s of this new mani- 
ftstation of the kindly feelings ( f the President 
towards France.' Was it properly afipreciated 
by the French Government? Was it received in 
the s.ime iiberd and fri nd y spirit from which it 
h:id proceeded? Let the sequei answer these 
questions. I shall read yon Mr. I.ivir'gston's 
opinion on the subject. In a letter to Mr. F.n.syth, 
under dale of the 22d November, 1834, he thus 
expresses himself: 

" I do not hope for any decision ou our aflairs 
befino the middle of January. One rolivf. for 
delay is .in expec'aiion that the message of the 
President may arrive before the discussion, and 
that it may contain something to s.iow a strong 
national fechng on the subject. This is not 
mere cmtjecltirr; I /enow the foci,- and I repeat 
now, fom a fidl knowledge of the case, wliati 
have more than once stated in triy former de- 
spatches as my firm persuasion, that the mo lerate 
tone taken by our Government, wlicii the z-cjectioD 



10 



was first known, was attributed by some to indif- 
ference, or to a conviction on the part of the 
President that t e would not be supported in anv 
Etron.;; pc;4sure by the people, and by others t>) 
a ccinsciousness that the convention had given us 
more than we were entitled to ask." 

I shall now proceed to show in what manner 
the French Guvernment performed the engage- 
ment M hich hat! been made by their Representa- 
tive in Washington tc hasten the presentation of 
the rejected law as much as possible. 

The Chambers met on the 31st July, and the 
King mid' them a speech. This speech contains 
no allusion tottie subject of (he treaty except the 
foUnwing: " Ihc laws necessary for cwrrying trea- 
ties into effect, and those still required jfor the 
accomplishment of the promises of the Chamber, 
will be again presented to you in the course of 
this s. Sbion.-' 1 he rejected bill was not pre- 
sented After a session of two weeks, the Cham- 
bers were prorogued on the 16th August until 
the 29ia December,— a day, alnfiost a month after 
the next iTieetir:g of Congress. 

I admit tliat strong reasons existed for dis- 
pensing with that part of the obligation which re- 
quired tJie French GovL-rnnnent to present the 
bill at this short session. No good reason h:<s 
ever been alleged or can ever be alleged to ex- 
cuse them for proroguing the Ci-.ambers until so 
late a day as the 29th of December. They might 
have met, and they ought to have met, at an early 
period of the autumn. They have heretofore 
met, on different occasions, for the despatch of 
buMuess, in every month of the vfar. It was in 
Tarn that Mr; Livingston urged the necessity of 
Rn ejirlier meeting on the Count de Kigny. It 
was Ml vain that he appealed to the positive 
engagement of the French Government made 
by Mr. Serrurii r. It was in vain that he de- 
clared te hiro, "that the President could not, 
at the opening of the next sessign of Congress, 
avoid lading be'ore that body a statement of 
the then position of affairs on this interest- 
ing subject, nor, under any circumstances, permit 
thnt session to end, as it must, on the third March, 
without recommending surh measures as he may 
deem that justice and the honor of the countrvmiy 
require." All his remonstrances were disregard- 
ed. Instead of hastening the presentation of the 
rejected law as much as possible, tl^ey refused to 
as>iemt)le the Chambers in time even to present 
the bill before the meeting of Congress. Their 
meeting was so long delayed, as to render it almost 
impossible that their determiration should be 
known in this country before the close of the ses- 
sion, notwithstanding the President I^ad agreed 
not to present the subject to Congress at the pre- 
vious session, under a firm conviction that he would 
receive this determination in time to lay it before 
them at the commencement of their next session. 
Is there a Senator in this hull, who can believe fo'- 
a moment, that if the President had been informed 
the rejected bill would not be laid before the 
C'nambers until the 29th December, he would have 
refrained from communicating to Congress, at 
their previous session, the state of the controversy 
between the two countries? Upon this construc- 
tion, the eng'agement of the French Government was 



mere words, without the slightest meaiung; and 
the national vessel which brought it in such soletnn 
form, might much better have remained at home. 

What was the apology — \vh;it the pretext under 
which the King's Government refused to assemble 
the Chambers at an earlier period? It was, that Mr. 
Serrurier had made no ent^agemenl to that effect, 
and that the intention which he had expressed in be- 
half of his Government to do all that the constitu- 
tion allows, to hasten, as much as possible, the pe- 
riod of the new presentation of the rejected law, 
meant no m:)re than that this was their disposition. 
The word " intention" is thus changed into "dis- 
position" by the Count de Kigny; and the whole 
engagement which was presented to the President 
in such an imposing form, was thus converted into 
a mere unmeaning profession of their desire to 
hasten this presentation as much a» possible- 
Sir, a* the commencement of the session of Con- 
gress, it became the duty of the President to speak, 
and what could any Americ-in expect that he 
would say? The treaty hud been violated in the 
first instance, by the Ministers of the French King, 
in neglecting to lay it before the Chmbr rs until 
after the first instalment w.'iS due. It was then 
twice submitted, at so late a periwl of the session, 
th:it it was impossible for the Chambers to exa- 
mine and decide the question before their ad' 
journment. On the last of these occasions, the 
chairman of the committee, to which the subject 
was referred, had reported a severe reprimand 
against the Government, for not having sooner 
presented the bill, and expressed a hope that it 
might be presented at an early period of the next 
session. It was then rejected by the Chamber of 
Deputies; and when the French Government had 
solemnly engaged to hasten the presentation of 
the rejected law, as soon as their Constitution 
would permit, they prorogue the Ciiambers to the 
latest period which custom sanctions, in the very 
face of the remonstrances of the Minister of the 
United States. I ask again, sir, before such an 
array of circumstances, what could any man, what 
could any American expect the President would 
say in his message? The cup of forbearance had 
been drained by him to the very dreg^. It was 
then his duty to speak so as to be heard and to 
be regarded on the other side of the Atlantic. If 
the same spirit which dictated the message, or 
any thing like it, had been manifested by Con- 
gress, the money, in my opinion, would ere 
this have been paid. 

The question was then reduced to a sin.^le point 
WS demanded the execution of a sob mn treaty; 
it had been refused. France had promised again 
to bring the question before the Chambers as 
soon as possible. The Chambers were prorogued 
until the latest day. The President had everj 
reason to believe that France was trifling with us, 
and that the treaty would again be rejected. Is 
there a Senator, within the sound of my voice, 
who, If France had finally determined not to pay 
the money, would have tamely submitted to this 
violation of national faith* Not one! 

The late war with Great Britain elevated us 
in the estimation of the whole world. In everjr 
portion of Europe, we have reason to be proud 
that we are American citizens. We have paid 



11 



dearly for the exalted character we now enjoy 
amonff the nations, an'' we ought to preserve ilnnd 
transmit it unimpaired to future peiieia'ions. To 
tlieni it V ill be a most precious inlieritance. 

If, after having compelled the weaker na'ions 
of the world to p«y us indemnities for captures 
made from our citizens, we shoidd cower bufon- 
the power of France, and abandon our rights 
against her, when they had be^n secure 1 by :< 
Roiemn treaty, we should be regirded us a mere 
HectMr amon;r the nations. Tlie same course 



Executive, both by public opinion and by the 
wrongs which we had so long patiently endured. 
Who can suppose that the Kx-f utive intentled to 
mesiace France, or to oi>uiu iVom her fears what 
would be denied by her sense o!" justice? The 
President, in tiiis very message, expressly dis- 
claims such an idea. Mer lii^tory places her far 
above any such imputation, 'I he wonder is, how- 
she could have ever .upposed the President, 
.)gtin-.t his own soiemn declaration, intended to do 
her any such injustice. She ought to h ,ve consid- 




try 

message? Let it be scanned with eagle eyef=, «nd 
there is nothing in its language at which tl^e most 
fas' idious critic can take oOencc. it contains an 
enumeration of our wrongs in mild and dignified 
langti'ge, and a contingent recominendution of 
reprisals, in c;ise the indemnity should again be 



after. 



We have now arrived at the special message of 
the President to Congress of the 26lh February 
last; a document which has a moU important 
bearing on the appropriation of the three milions 
which was reject, d by the Senate. I have given 
" ■ " with 



rejected bv the Chambers. But in thi.*, and in aU | this historical sketch of our controver.sy 
other respecLs. it defers en irelv to the judgment! France, for the pvirpose ot bringing Senators to 
ofCon?rJs.s. Every idea of an intended menace the very point of time, and to the precne condi- 
\s excluded by the I'resident'.. express declaration. <1'tion of this question, when the Senate negativea 



He says: "Such a measure ought not to be consi-} that approprmtHMi 
dered by France as a menace. Her jiride and 
power are too well known to expect any thing 
from her fears, and prechide the necessity of the 
dpclaration, that nothing partaking of the cha- 
racter of in'imidation is intended by us." 

I a.sk ag.iin, is it not forbearing in it« language' 
Is there a single statement in, it not founded upon 
truth? Does it even state the whole truth against 
France? Are there not strong points omitted? 
All these questions must be answered in the af- 
firma'ive. Ou this subject we hare strong evi- 



What had Congress done m realion X.) tnc 
Fr.-nch que'tion when this messige was pre-ented 
to \\s> Nothing, sir, nothing. The Senate had 
unanimouslv pas^-ed » resolution on the 15th Jan- 
uary, thit it was inexpedient, at present, to adopt 
any legislative measure, in regard to the State of 
affairs between the United States and Fcance. 
This unanimity was obtained by two considera- 
tions. The one was, that the French Chambers 
had been convened, though not f .r the purpose 
of acting upon our treaty, on the fir.^t, instead of 



dencc from the Duke dc Kroglie himself In the 29th of December a f*ct unknown to the 
his fa:r,ous letter to Mr. Pageot of June 17th, President at the date of his m( s.sage. 1 '^ <'«^r. 



1835, — the :u*row of the Parthian as he flew, — 
this facl is admitted. He savs 



tint this clrcumsttinrc afforded a reasonable ground 

of hope, that we might learn their final determi- 

«If we examine in detail the message of the "lation before the clo.se of our session on the 3d 

'^ March. But whatever may have been the causes, 

the Senate had determined that, for the present, 
nothing should be done. 



President of the Un ted Stute.s, (I mean thnt part 
of it which concerns the relntioi s between the 
Uniled Stales and France,) it will possibly be 
found, that pas.sing successively from phrase to 
phrase, none will he met that cannot bear an in- 



In the House of Representatives, at the date of 

,„, „ - the Special message, on the 26!h February, no 

terprctation more or less plausible, nor of which, measure whatever, had been i.dop'e.l. The Pre- 
strict y speaking, it cannot be said that it is a .sim- sident h«d just cans, to believe that the scm.meiits 



pie expose of such a fact, true in itself, or the as 
.sertioii of such or such a right which no one con- 
tests, or the performance of s'ich or such an 
obligation imposed on the President by the very 
nature of his functions. There will certainly be 
found several in which the idea of impeaching the 
good faitli of the French Government, or of act- 
ing upon it through menace or intimidation, is 
more or less distvowed." 

It was the whole message, and not any of the 
detached parts, at which the French Government 
chose to take oflence. 

It is not my present purpose to discuss the pro- 
priety of the recommendation of reprisals, or 
whether that was the best mode of redress which 



contained in his message to Congress, at the com- 
mencement of their session, were not m unison 
with the feelings of either br:inch of the legislature. 
He, therefore, determined to lay all the informa- 
tion in his possession before Congress, and leave it 
for them to decide whether any or what measures 
should be adopted for the defence ot the country. 
1 shrdl read this message. It is as f .Hows : 

«'I transmit to Congress a n port fri-m the Se- 
cretary of State, with copies of all tlie letters re- 
ceived from Mr. Livingston since the message to 
the House of Representatives of the 6th instant, 
of the instructions given to th-,.t Minister, and of 
all the late correspondence with tlie Fiench Got- 
ernment in Paris, or in Washinston, except a note 



could kave been suggested. Some decided re- of Mr. Serrur.er, which, for the reasons ttiited m 
commendaUon, however, was required from the' the report, is not now communicaiea. 



12 



It will DC seen that I have deemed it my tluty 
to instruct Mr. L vii'g'slon to quit France with his 
)egF.t'or n: d rt»nr.! to i!ie United Stales, if an ap- 
propriation tor the {'uif.lment of the convention 
shall be lefused by the Chambers. 

The subject bt-ing now, in ail its present as- 
pects, bi.i"i;re Corg'iess, whose right it is to de- 
cide Wiiat measures are to be pursued on that 
event, I de. m it unnecessary to make fuither re- 
comnnoridyt on, being coniiden; that, on their p <rt, 
every thing- will be done to ma'ntain the rigb.ts 
and honor of the country which the occasion rt- 
quiies." 

The Pre-ident leaves the wliole question to 
Congress. What was the infoimalion then com- 
Tttuiiicited ' Th 4 a ve'^}'- high s'ate of excitement 
existed itgiinst us in France. Tliat the French 
Ministi-r Isad been recal'ed from th's country; an 
act wh^ch is geu'rally the immediate perciirsor of 
hostUities between na ions. Beside.*, Mr. Living- 
ston, wiio was a compi tent judge and on the spot, 
with the best means of knovviedge, informed his 
Goveriiii e.'.t that he would net be surpiized, 
should ilie law be rejected, if they antlciuat- 
ed our reprisals, .■by the seizure of our vessels 
in port, or the attack of our ships in the 
Mediterrar^ean, by a supet-ior force. Such were 
his apprehensions upon th's subji ct, that he 
felt it to be his duty, wlhoutdeby, to ii.fovm Coni- 
modoie Fattt rson of tiic state of things, so that 
he might be upon his t-uard. 

Oug.'-t these apprehen-ions of Mr. Livingston 
to have l;een disrctcarded.' Let the history ot tliat 
gallant people answer this question. How often 
has the Jujustice of their cause been concealed 
fror.-i t;ieir own view, by the dazzling l>rilliancy of 
some gran I and striking (t-xploit.? Glory is thei- 
passi( 13, and th-ir great Empsnor, who ktiew thtm 
best, iiften acted upon this principle. To anticipHte 
their enemy, and commenct" the war with sonf.e 
bold stroke, v,'ould be in pcifect iiccordance with 
their character. 

Every Senator, when he vo',ed upon the appro- 
priation, must have known, or at least might have 
known, all the information which was contained 
in the documents accompanying the President's 
mes.sage. 

It has been objected, that if the President de- 
sired this appiopiiation «f three millioms, he 
ought to have recommended it in his mess'ge. 
I protest ag inst this principle. He acted wisely, 
discreetly, and with a becoming respect for Con- 
gress, to leave the whnle q.iest on to their deci- 
sion. Th's was especially proper, as we had not 
thought j)roper to adopt any measure in relation 
to the subject. 

Siipposr the President bar!, in his special mes- 
sage, recommended this ap|--ropriation, what wou'd 
have been s.id, and justly said, upon the subject'' 
Denunciations the most eloquent wotdd have 
resoundtd against him throughout the wh'.Ie 
country, from Georgia to Miine. It would have 
every wl^ere been proclaim, d as an act of Execa- 
tive dict:iti m. In our then existing relations 
with France, it would have been said, and said 
•with much f re?, that such a recommendttion 
from tlie Kxccutive might have had a tendency 
to exasperate her people, and produce war. 



Besides, I shall never consent to adopt the prin- 
ciple that we ought to take no measures to deu nd 
the country, witliout the reccmmeii' a'ion of the 
Executive. This would be to subn.il to ihat very 
dictation, against wiiich, on other occa-ions, gen- 
tle -Tien themselves have to loud y protested. No 
sir, I shnil always assert the perlect right of eoi.i- 
gress to act upon such subjects, independently cf : 
any Executive recommendation. 

This special message w;-.s referred to th.e Com- 
ipi.tee on Foreign Relations, in the llquse of Re- 
presenta'ives, on the 26th February. On the next 
day they reported three resolutions, one of which 
was, "that ccntipgent preparation ou,qht to be 
made,to meet any emerge ncy growing (yu' of our re- 
hitions with France." 1 he session was rwpidly draw- 
ing to a close. But a few days of it then remained. 
It would have been vain to act upon this resolution. 
It wass mere absUa'jtion. Had it been adopted, 
it could have produced no eflect; the money was 
wanted to place the country in astate of def, nce,and 
not a mere opinion that it ought to be granted. The 
Chaimian of the Committee on Foreign rela- 
tiojis, therefore, on the 28th February, had this 
resolution laid upon the table, a td gave notice 
that he would move an amendment to the fortifi- 
cation bill, appropriating three millions of dollars, 
one mill. on to the army, and two millions to the 
navy, to provide ior the contingent defence of 
the country. 

It Kss been urged, that because the President, 
in his last annual message, lias sai-l that this con- 
tingent appropriation was inserted accoixling to 
his views, that some blam.e altaches to him from 
the mode of its introduction. Witliout pretending 
to know the fact, V v. ill venture the assertion, that 
he never requested any member, either of this or 
the other branch of the Legislature, to make such 
a motion- He had taken his stand — he had left the 
vvh(.le subject to Congress. I'rom this he never 
departed. If the Chairman of any committee, or 
any other member of the Senate or the House, 
called upon him to know his views upon the sub- 
ject, he no doubt communicated them freely and 
frankly. This is his nature. Surely no hi inie can 
attach to him for having expre.'-sed his opinion 
upon this subject to any member who ni'ght ask it. 
It has been tiie uniform course pursued on such oc- 
casions. 

On the 2d of March, the House cf Representa- 
tives, by a unanimous vote, resolved that, in their 
opinion, the treaty with France, of the 4th July, 
1831, should be maintained, and its execution in- 
sisted on. This was no party vote. It was dicta- 
ted by a common American feelinc, which rose su- 
perior to party. After this solemn declaration of 
the House, m^de in the face of the world, how 
could it be supposed they would adjourn, widiout 
endeavoriFig to place the countr}^ in an a'titude of 
defence.'' What, sir! the Representatives of the 
People, with an overflowing treasur\ , to leave the 
country naked and exposed to hostile invasion, and 
to make no provision for our navy, after h.aving 
declared unanimously that the treaty should be 
maintamed! Who could have supposed it? 

On the th rd of March, upon the moton of the 
Chuirman of the Committee on Foreign Relations 
(Mr. Cambreleng,) and in pursuance of the notice 



13 



which he had g-iven on t'^e 2f!th of pL^bruaiy, this 
appropriation of 'hree nfiilhons was annexed as an 
amendment to th.; fortifi-ation bill The vote 
lip m the q'lfstion was 109 in tlie adirmuive, and 
77 in th"- neg'^tiv^. Tliis vote, ;''M(0 i^-irli not 'irirui- 
imnus, like the forintr, was n;) [i;irly vote. 'I'he 
bill, (lius amcndrd, was brouj^ht to the Senate. 
Now sir, let me ask, if this appropriation liad pro- 
ceeded from die House alone, without any mcs 
sag-e or any .siurgjestion from the Executive, would 
not this have b en a legitimate i^ource? Ought 
sucti an approprlaiion to be opnnsed in the Senat-, 
hec.iuse it had not received Krtecntive sanction' 
n-.ve the ISeprcsfntatives of the People no rcjht 
to orig'U.ate a bill fur the d -fen :e and security of 
their c-wisiituents and t'.cir country, without first 
consulting the will of tli^ President? For one, I 
sliull n-v-r s ibmit to any s'lch a slavish princ |)le. 
It would m ike the Executive every thing': and 
Congress nothing. 

Hal t'lr- i'demnity b«;en absohitely rejected by 
the.Chimbers, he two nations woidd have been 
pliced in a s'nte of defiance towards each other, j 
In sirch a coiidi i>n it was the right — na>, m-.rf, it 
was the imperative duty of the House of Hepre- 
seni'.itlves to make contingent piep.-.iation for tlie 
worst, 'fhc urgency of the case was still more 
strik'ng, bc-cMuse in ten or eleven of the States 
riejiiesent .ti es could not be elected until months 
after tlie adjou'nment, and therefore Congress 
' 1 .lot have been assembled to meet any emer- 
,' whicii might occur. 
, i5iit, sir, does it require a recommentlation of 
the Executive, or a vote of the House of Repre- 
sent.uives, lo<r!i;i..ute.siic!i an..ppr.-:prlit on' Any 
individual Sen.aior or member of the House may 
do it wi;h tlie strictest propriety. Did the Sena- 
torn Delaware (.Mr. r.laylon) a:;k the appro 
'nofth<- Presid-Pif, before he made the mo- 
ti .1 ♦ the last ses.sion, which does i»im so much 
h i:i jr, X' intTCise tlie appropr ation for fortifica- 
- '>ah a million' How did the amfiidm'nts 
osed by the Suv^tor from .Massachusetts (Mr. 
'*. V ijster) to the foi tificntion bill of the la.-t ^e.^- 
. sion originate? I presume from tlie Committee 
of Finance, of which he was the Chairman. No 
doibt he conf.-rred witii the He.id of t!ic proper 
Executive dtpartment, accor'ling to tlip custom ii> 
such cases; but ttill these appropriations of more 
than four hundred thousand dollai'S had tlicir ori- 
giu in tliat comTiittc". It was a proper, a /tgit'- 
mate source, 's then the ancient practice to be 
ch»nged, and nmst it become a standing rii !e that j 
we are t<' appropriate no mo. ley witliout the or- 
ders or tii expiessed wish of the Executive? 11 
^ trust not. I 

\ The form of ttii-! appropriation has been object- 1 

fed to. I -shall read it, j 

i I 

*l ■" ^liid he it fa'thcr ennded. That the sum ofi 
three millions ot dollars be, and the s\m<- is here- 1 
by, appropriated out of any money in the 'F'rt-a- j 
sury not olhtr'.vi^e appropriated, to be expended, 
iu whoU- or in part, ui'der the direction of the 
President of th« United Sta'es, for the military ] 
aii'^ nivil service, inchiiiing fortifications and ord- 
nance, and increase of the Navy: Provided, ^uch | 
expenditui es shall be rendtred necessary, for I'je ' 



defence of the countrj', prior to the next meeting 
of Congress." 

It has bren urged, that to grant the mnney in 
such gpner!>! terms wouli have been a violation of 
the Cons'ilution. I do not un^'crstand that <he 
.Senator from Massachusetts, (Mr. Webster,) at 
the present sessi n, has distinc'ly placed it upon 
this ground. Other Sen.ators hive (ion:* s;i in the 
strongest terms- Is there any thij'g in th • Consti- 
tution which touches the question' I simply de- 
c'ares that "no money shall be draAu from the 
Treasury, but in consequence of apprnpriations 
made by law." Whether these appropriations 
shall be general or sp-cifi^ is left i-nt rely, fas it 
ought to IiHve been, to the discretion ot Congress 
[ a Imit that, ex vi termini, an appropriation of 
money must have a reference to some ohj -ct. Hut 
whether you refer to a class, or to an individual, to 
the genus or to the s lecit'S, your apprtpriation is 
equally constitutional The degree of specifica- 
tion necessary to make the law valid never can 
cnne a constitutional question. The t-rms of 
the instrument are as brond and as gene ul as the 
English Inngmge can m^ke them. In tltis parti- 
cular, as in almost every other, the framers of the 
Constitution have manifested their v.'i-dom and 
their forfslgl't. Cases may occur wnd huve occur- 
red in the history of this Gover.nme'it, demanding 
the strictest secrfcy; cases in whirh to sprcify 
would be to defeat tlie very object of tlu' appro- 
priation. A remarkable exnmnle of ll'.is kind oc- 
curs ill the administration of Mr. .lefFevsoti, to 
which I shall presently advert. 

T;. ere arc other cases in which from the very 
nature of things you c uinot speciiy the objects 
of an appropriation witiiout the gift of prophecy. 
I take the present to be a clear ca^ic of this de- 
scription. The appropiittion was contingent; 
it was to be f<U" the d- fence of the country. 
How th(?n ^'cou'd it hitve bt en specific? How 
co'ild you forcs-e when, or where, or how the 
attack of France vrouklbe miule? Whilhout this 
foreknowledge, you could not designate when, or 
where, or hoiv it wotdd become neccss ry to use 
the money. This must depend upon France, not 
upon ourselvp*. Slie might be disposed to con- 
fine the contest merely to a naval war. In that 
event it would become necessary to *-'p[)ly the 
whole sum to secure us against naval attacks. She 
might threuten to invade t^ouisiana or any other 
poriion of the Union. The money would then 
be required to call out the militia, and to march 
them :ind the regular army to that point. Every 
thing must depend upon the movements of the 
enemy. It might become rieceasary, in order most 
efTectually to resist the contemplate I attack, to 
con-.truct steam frigates or steam batteries, or it 
might be deemed more proper to iucrcr.se your 
ordinary navy and complete and arm your fortifi- 
cations. In a f'ouutry where Congre-s cannot be 
always in .'■ession, you must in times of danger, 
grant some discretionary powers to the Executive* 
This sho\ild always be avoided when it is possible, 
consistc^tl} with the safety of the '-ountfy. But 
it was wise, it was prudent in the fiamers of the 
constitution, in order to meet such cases, to de- 
clare in general terms that "no money shall be 
drawn from the Trea.sury, but in consequence of 



14 



»pproprktron« made by law." Not specific appro- 

Enatiofls. The terms'are general »nd unrestricted 
'the amendmfnt had appropriated one million 
to fortifications, the second million to the increase 
of lue navy, and the third to the purchase of 
ordance and arms, it mig^ht have been found that 
a great deal too much liad been appropriated to 
one object, and great deal too little to another. 

As a matter of expediency, as a means of limit- 
ing the discretion of Ex'^cutive officers, I am de- 
cidedly friendly to i^iecific appropriations, when- 
ever they can be made. 1 so declared in the df bate 
Sit the last session. I then expressed a wish that 
this appropriation had been more specific; but 
upon reflection, T do not sec how it could have 
been made much more so, unless we had possesse<l 
the gift, of prophecy. But the constitutioij has 
nothingto do with the quebtion. 

After all, 1 attached more value to specific ap- 
propriations betore I had examined this subject, 
than I doEt the present moment. Still [admit 
their importance. The clause which immediately 
follows in the constitution ia the true touchstone 
of responsibility. Although the appropriation 
may he general; yet "a regular statement and 
account ot the receipts and expenditures of all 
public money skall be published from time to 
time." No matter in what lang^jage public ir.o- 
ney may be gTa^ted to the Executive, in its ex- 
penditure, he is but the mere trustee of the Ame- 
rican people, and he must produce to them his 
Touchers for every cent entrusted to his care. Thi.s 
constitutional piovisinn iiolds him to a strict re- 
sponsiblity, to a responsibility much more severe 
than If Conjjre-w had been required in all cases 
to make spi-cific appiopriations. 

!Iov,' Senators can cr&ats a Dictator, and give 
him unlimited power over the purse and the 
swonl out ftf SMch an appropriation, I am at a loss 
to concfii'e. It is a flight of imagination beyond 
imy reach. What, sir, to appropiiate three mil- 
iions for the milit.iry and naval def.nce of the 
country i» case it should become necessary during 
the recess of Congress, and at its next meeting to 
compel the President to account for the whole 
sum he may here expended; is this to crcHte a 
Dictator.'' Is this to sunender our liberties into 
the hrinda of sne man? And yet gentlemen have 
contended for this proposition. 

What has been the practice of the Government 
In regard to this subject? Daring the period 
©f our lw» first Presidents, appropriations were 
made in the most general terms. No one then 
imagiRcd ih'it this was a violation of th« conatltu- 
tion. When Mr. Jefferson eame into power 
this practice was changed. In his message 
to Congress of December 8th, 1801, he says; 
*' In o«r care too of the pubKe contributions 
entrusted to our discretion, it would bo pru- 
dent to jcuhiply harriers against their dissipa- 
tion, by appropriating specific sums to every 
specific purpose nusreptible of definition. Sus- 
eeptihle of ■■''Jitiidan. Here i? the rule, and 
here is ti»c exception. He treats the subject 
Bot as a cons'itutional question, but as one of 
mere expediency. In little more than two short 
rears afler this recommendation, Mr. Jefferson 
found h was necessary to obtain an appropriation 



from Congress in the most general terms. To Kave 
made it specific would necessarily have defeated 
its very object Secrecy was necessary to suc- 
cess. Accordingly on the 26th February, 1803, 
Congress mi*de itje most extraordinary appri>pria- 
tion in our annals. They granted to the President 
the sum of two millions of dollars •* for the pur- 
pose of defraying any eXlrsordinary expenses 
which may be incurred in the intercourse between 
tliC United States and foreign nations." Here, sir, 
was a grant almost without any limit. It Wits co- 
extensive with the whole world. Every nation on 
the face of the earth was witliin the sphere of its 
operation. The President might have used this 
money to subsidise foreign nations to destroy our 
liberties. That he was utterly incapable of such 
conduct it is scarcely necessary to observe. I do 
not know that I should have voted for such an 
unlimi'ed grant. Still, however, there was a 
responsibility to be found in his obligation under 
the constitution to account for its| expenditure- 
Mr. Jefferson never used nny part of thi« appro- 
printion. It had been intended for the purcliasc 
of the sovereignty of New Orleans and of other 
possessions in that quart< r; but our treaty with 
Fraiicd of the 30 h Ajiri! 1803, by whicli Louisiana 
was ceded to us, rendered it unneceeeary for him 
to draw any part of this money from tlie Trea- 
sury, under the act of Congress, by v/isivh it had 
been granted. 

Before the c!os« of Mr. Jefferson's second terra, 
it was found that specific appropriations in the ex- 
tent to whicli they had been carried, hnd become 
inconvenient. Congress often granted too much 
for one object, and too little for another. This 
must nece.«sarily be the c:i:;e, becsiuse wc cannot 
say b: forehand p'-ecis ly how much shall be re- 
quired for any one purpose. On the 3d of M^rch, 
1809, an act whs passed, which was approved by 
Mr. Jefferson, containing the fo lowing provision: 

" Frovided, neverthekss, That, durir.g liie recess 
of Congress, the "resident of the United States 
nmy, and he is hereby authorized, on the applica- 
tion of the Secretary of the projjer department, 
and not otherwise, to direct, if in his opinion ne- 
ccss'jiry fur the public service, tli.at a portion of the 
moneys appropriated ibr a particular bianch of 
expenditure in that department, be applied t» 
anotl)er branch of expenditure in the same depart- 
ment; in which case, a soecial account of the mo- 
neys thus transferre<l, and ©f their application, 
sh^ll be laid before Congress during the first week 
of their next ensuing tession." 

Is this act constitutional? If it be so, there is bb 
end of the question. Has its constitutionality ever 
been doubted? It authorizes the Pre«i<i€nt to tike 
the money appropriated by CotJgress for one spe- 
cific object arwi apply it to an«tJier. The nr>oney 
destined for any one purpos* by an appropriation 
bill, may be diverted from that p<irpoae by the 
President, and be applied to any other purpose 
entirely different, witl* no limitation whatever upo» 
his discretion, except that money to be expended 
by one of the Departments, either of War, or of the 
Navy, or of the Treasury, could not be trarteferred 
to another Departn»ent. 

It is not my intention to cite all the precedents 
bearing' upon this question. I shall mer«Iy adrert 



13 



*o one other. On the 10th of March, 1812, Con- 
gre^ appropriated five hundred thousand dollars 
"for the purpose of fortifying nnd defending tiie 
Biaritinit.' fitmtier of the Uni'.ed States." I hi« 
wasi in nittjcipation of tiie lale war witli Great Bri- 
•aifl, and is as gent ral in its terms, and leaves »s 
much to Executive dincrction, as tlie proposed ap- 
propriation of thiee millions. 

I trust, then, that I have established the posi- 
tions that this appioprialion originated from a Ic- 
gitimati' source — was necessary,for tlie defence 
and lienor olthf country, and violated no provi- 
sion of tlie cnnsiitution. If so, it ought to have rc- 
ceivc'.l the approhation of the Senate. 

When the fortificwtion bill came back to the 
Senate, with this apropriation attaclied to it by the 
House, the Senator from Massachusetts, (Mr. 
Webster,) instantly moved that itshould be reject- 
ed. I feci no disposition to make any harsh obber- 
Tationt in relation to that gentleman. I think, 
however, that his remark, that if the enemy had 
been thundering at tiic gates of the capitol, he 
would have moved to reject the appropriation, 
iras a most unfortunate one for himself. 1 consid- 
er il nothing more than a hold figure of speech. I 
feel the most p;rf«ct confidence that the gtntle- 
uan is now wilUng to rote :dl the money which 
may be necessary for the defence of the country-. 

Of the gcnileninn's sincerity in opposing this 



propiifltion, I did not then, nor do I now enter- 
tain a doubt. He was ardent and impas^ncd in j rendered incapable of attending 
his manner, and WMS evidently in a R'Hteo'Fhiglxly [t v/as legislation without delibc 



us to spire his T«te from the procewi of e:ipwAg- 
ing. You might as well att.-mpt lo expMMpe a 
sunbeam. That vote will live forever in the 
memory of the American people. 

It was tho vote of the Senate which gave 
the mortal bio* to the fortification bill. Had 
tht-y passed this appropriation of three ml lions, 
that bill would no* have been a Uw. Where it 
died, it is scarcely necessary to inquire It was 
in mortul .agony when th« coiisultition of six polit- 
ical doctors was held upon it at midnight, in our 
confer- nee chamber, nnd it probably brealiied its 
last, on its way fi^im that cliamberto the House of 
Kepresentatives, for want of a quorum in that 
body. 

Its fate, in one respect, I hope may yet be of 
service to the country. It ought to adm<Mii»h us, 
if possible, to do all our legislative businf «a before 
mihiiglit on the last dny of the session. I never 
shall forget the ni;»ht I sat side by nide, in the 
Houue of Representatives, with the Senator from 
Massachusetts, (.Mr. Webster,) until tlie morning 
had nearly dawned. The most important bill-) 
were contimikily returning from the Senate with 
amendments. It wouM liave been in the po^vcr 
of any one member remaining in tne Hoiwe %o have 
defeated any me.'isure by merely a.sking for a divi- 
sion. This would have shown that no quorum 
was pi-esent. Tlie member.^ who stili rcmHineJ 
were worn down ainl exhausted, and were thus 

to tlieir dutici, 
eration. I trust 



excited fet ling. Probably strong political preju-j that this evil may be now corrected. Should it 
dices may have influenctd hi.s judgment, w.thmit j not, I do not know tha'^ at the conchision of a 
bis knowlerlge. He thought that a high constitu- Congress, mv con.science would be no teller as 
tiona! queh-.ion w»<s involved in the amendment, , to prevent me from vot'.ng. us I have done hcrelo- 



and arte<l accordingly 

When the bill returned again to the Senate, af- 
ter wc h.id rejecte<l, and the House had insisted 
npoii their a!nen(!m"nt, tht; Stniator inimetliateiy 
moved lh.<t we sliMikl adhere to our rejection. I 
well recollect, .sir, that you, (Mr. King, o»" Ala- 
bama was intue chair,) remarked at the time, 
that this \v:»s a li.irsh motion,*' and should it pre- 
Tail, wou'd Je well calculated to exasperate the 
feelings ;;!" tiie House u. id to defeat the bill. You 
then observed tli»t tlie projjer motion would be 
to insi^t opKin our rvjt ction, and ask ■■* conference; 
and thut the motion to adht-re ought not to be re- 
«)rted to until all gentler measures had failed. 

The Senator now claims the merit, and b anx- 
lou.s to SMustain the leapousibility, of baring moved 
to reject this appropriation. He also asks in mer- 
cy, that when the expunging procass shall com- 
mence, his vote, upon this occasion, may be spared 
from its operation. 

For the sake of my countn,', and in undisguised 
sincerity «»f piupose, I declare, for the sake of the 
gentleiTrin, 1 am rijoiced that the responsibility 
^liich he covet8, will, jirobably, not be so drsad- 
ftiU as we had just reason to apprehend. Had 
France atti.cked us, or ^tliould she yet attack us, 
in our prescn'. defvuceIe^^•s condition; .should our 
cities be exposed to pillage, or the blood of our 
citizens be shed, either upon the land or ihe ocean; 
should our n^tion:il ch 'i-act-r be dishonored; tre- 
mendous, indeed, would be the lesponsibilily oftha 
gentleman. In that event, he need not beseech 



fore, after midnight on the tliin.1 of March. 

I have one other point to discuss. I shall own 
procee<l io present to the Senate the state of our 
relations wltli France, at the proHont moment, for 
the purpose of proving, that we ought to ad -pt 
the re8< lutions oi the Senator from Missouri (Mr. 
Henton) and grant all appropriations neceiwary 
for the defence of the country. For this pur- 
pose, we must agnin r^ turn to Pari-;. The Presi- 
dent's annual Mt^s^p.ge of I).-cember, 18,>4, nrrived 
in that city o.'i the Slii of January — a day propi- 
tious in our annals. The attack upon the U.itish 
troops on the night of tlve '2'3d of December did 
not surprise them more than this MeH.sage <l»il t!>e 
French ministem. After the most jniitent eivlu- 
rance of wrongs for »o many years, ther seenisd 
to be astounde<l that the President shoUd have 
asserted our rights in such a bold and nyud>' man- 
ner. That Message, sir, will eventually produce 
the payment of the indemnity. What cflVct hiKi it 
upon the character of our country abroad? Let 
Mr. Livingnton answer this question' In writing 
to the Secretary of State, on the 11th January, 
1835, he says: " It baa •ert.iiBly raised om !« the 
estimation of other Powers, if I nuiy judgt- from 
the dem«anor of their repretjentativt-^ here; and 
my opinion is, that as soon as the first excitement 
3ubside«, it will operate favorably on the councils 
of France." There was not an American in Psiris, 
on that day, who upon the peruf-al of this Mes- 
sage, did not feel the flush of hontat pride of 
country mantling in his countenance. 



16 



On the 22(1 of November previous, Mr. Living- 
ston was conviiicefl that the Kin.e^ was sincere in 
his intention of urging tlie execution of the trea- 
ty, and then had no lioubt of the sincerity ot hi-* 
r;!:i)in,.t. yj;e 01'.-=i"-'>er.-i asserrib'ed on t'le first 
of Decemncr; aa:i after au arduous stiUj^^le for 
two days a?»inst the opposition, victory perched 
upon the banner of 'he ministers. Thc-y were 
thns securely seaU'd in tln-ir places. On tlie 6tii 
of December Mr. Liviiigst n aguin writes, that 
♦'The convers-tions I have had wi'.h the Kin^^ ai;d 
alltbc m'ri'Bter.*, cc!v. ince me tliat now they are 
perfectly in earnest, and uni'ed on tlie question 
ofths treaty, and that it will be u ged with zeal 
and ability." In a fc-w short days, however, a 
change came over their spirit. On the 22.1 De- 
cember Mr. Livingston uses the f ;11 ^wing lan- 
.e:uage in writing tn the Depv.rtment of State: — 
"My 1 st despatch (6tii Uecernber) was wiitten 
imme.'liately after the vote ot the Chamber of De- 
puties had, as it was thought, secured a majority 
to the Ad:Ti nistratio'1; und it naturally excited 
hopes whicii fhat yupppsiti'in was c-dcuUted to in- 
spire. I soon found, however, b'>t i from the 
tone of the Adminis' ration press, and from the 
language <!.f the King, and aii die mini-sier?; Vv^ith 
whom I confeired on the sul)ject, that thej were 
not willing to put tlieir popidarity t-> the test en 
our question; it will net be made one on tl,c de- 
terminr.tion of which the ministers are willing to 
I'isk their portfolios, 'i'he very next day, after tlie 
debate, the ministerial gazette fDts Dehah ) de- 
clared that, satisfied with the approbation tlie 
Chamber had given to their systetr, it was at 
perfect; liberty lo exercise its discretion as to par- 
icuhii measures which do not furm an essenlinl 
part of that system; and tlie communications 1 sub- 
sequently had With the King and the ministers 
confirnie<I nie in the opinion that the law for exe- 
cuting our jponvenUo^n was to be considered as 
one of those free questions. I combatted thi;; 
opinion, and asked \\ hether the fli tiiful observ- 
ance of treaties was not an esserdial part of their 
system; and, if so, whether it did not come with- 
in their rule." 

The observance of treaties was not an essential 
part of their system ! Victorious and securely fixed, 
the ministers would not risk thtii' places in 
attempting to obtain from tiie Chambers the ap- 
propriation required to carry our treaty into exe- 
cution. It would not be made a cabinet question. 
It is evident they had determined to pursue the 
same course of delay and procrastination which 
they had previously pursued. Sut the message 
arrived, and it roused them from their apathy. 
All doubts which had existed upon the subject of 
making the payment of our indemnity a cabinet 
question at once vanished. We have never heard 
of any tuch since; and it was not untii some 
monihs after, iliat the Frcncli Ministers thought of 
unnesing any condition to tiiis payment. 
. Ou the 13th .January, Mr. Livingston had a con- 
ference witli tlie Count de Rigny. He then ex- 
plained to him the nature of a message f;.-;ni our 
President to Congress. He conr;pAred it to a 
jamily council under the French law, and sliowed 
that it was a mere communication froin one brancii 
of our Government to another, with which a foreign 



nation had no right to interfere, and at which, 
they ought not to take offence. They parted on 
friendly terms, and again met on tlie s^tme terms 
in the evening, atths Auhtrian Ambassador's. Mr. 
Living.ston was, therifoi'e, much astoiiishtd v/hen 
about ien o'c'ock at nighc of the .same dav, lie 
received a note- from die Count, informing him 
diat Mr. Serruri r, the French .Vl'ni'.ter at Wash- 
ington, had been recalled, and that his pussports 
wei e at his service. This seems to have been a 
sudden determiwitiqn of the Frensh OAbinet. 

Noii', SI!-, upon the pres'.impt'on that Fr -nee had 
been insulted by the message, th s wa^ tlie proper 
mode of resenting die insult. Prompdy to suspeml 
all diplomatic intercourse with the ..stt on who had 
menaced her or questioned iier honor, v\ as a mode of 
redress worthy cfher iiigli and chivalrous character. 
The next impulse (if wound d pride would be- 
promptly to pay the debt which she owed, and 
release herself from every pecuniary obligation to 
tlie nation wliicli had dimu her this wror.g Thes'.- 
V, ere the /ii'bt determinations of the King's Min- 
isters, 

France has sincebeen placed before the world, 
by her rulers, in the most false position ever oc- 
cupied by a br*ve and gallant lu'tioi. She be- 
lieves herselfto be insulted, and what is the conse- 
quence' She refaes to pay a d-jbt now admitted 
♦o be just by all the branchf.sof her Government. 
Her wounded feelings are estimuTed by dollars 
and ceii^ and she withholds twenty-five mi lions 
offr'na^due to a foreign niition, to soothe her 
injured pride. How are the mighty fallen! Truly 
it maybe said, the days of chivalry are gone. Have 
the pride and the genius of Nap'jieon left no tra- 
ces' of themselves under the constitutional mon- 
archy? In private life, if you are insidted by an 
individual to whom you are indt-bed, what Is the 
first impulse of a man of honor? To owe no pe- 
cuniary obligation to the man who has wounded 
your feelings — to pay him the debt instantly, and 
to demand reparation for the insult, or at the least, 
to hold no friendly communication with him after- 
wards. I 

This course the King's ministers ha<l> at first, 
determined to pursue. The re.-ison why they 
abandoned it, I shall endeavor to explain here- 
after. 

Mr. Livingston, in his letter to Mr. Fcr.n-th of 
the 14th Januaiy, 1835, says: "The lav*.-, it is said, 
will be presented to <lay, and I have very little 
doubt that it will pass. The ministerial phalanx, 
reinforced by those of the opposition, ^and they 
are not a fev;-,) who will not take the responsibility 
of involving the country in the difficulties which 
tliti] now see must ensue, will be sufficient to car- 
ry the vote." 

Did Mr. Livingston intend to say, that Franci* 
would be teirified into this measure? By no 
means. But, in the iiitcrcourse between inde- 
pendent States, there is a point at which diplo- 
imcy nmst end, and when a nation must either 
abandon her rightF, or determine to assert them by 
the sword, m by such ttrong and decided measures 
as may eventually lead to ho-stilities. Wiien this 
point is reached, it becomes a serious and alarm- 
ing crisis for those, to whom, on earth, die destiny 
of nations is entruiited. When the one alternative 



17 



is war, either immediate or prospective, wi(h all 
the miseries which follow in its train, and the 
other the payment of a just debt to an ancient 
ally and firm friend, who could doubt what must 
be the decision? Such was the position in which 
France stood towards the United States. Not 
only justice, but policy required the payment of 
the debt. In the event ot war, or, of a non-inter- 
course between the two nations, her wine-growers, 
her producei-s and manufacturers of silk, and all 
her other manufacturing interests, especially those 
of her souihem provinces, would be vitally injured. 
The payment of five millions of dollars would be 
but a drop in the ocean, compared with the extent 
of their suffering-s. In Frunce, they then believed 
that the time for diplomacy — the time for pro- 
crastination had ended. The President's Message 
had opened their eyes to the importance of the 
aubiect. It was under this impression, tliat Mr. 
Livwgston predicted that the bill would pass the 
Cbambeni. That it would have done so, witliout 
any condition, had Congress responded to the Pre- 
sident's Meiisage, I do not say, by authorizing re- 
prisals, but by manifesting a decided resolution to 
insist upon the execution of the treaty, will, I think, 
appear abundantly evident hcrciifter. 



tion of the message being made a condition of the 
payment of the money. The c'auses in the bill to 
which I have adverted, were evidently inserted to 
meet the contingency of reprisals having been 
sanctioned by Congress. 

TliC ucbate upon the bill in the Chamber of 
Deputies commenced on the 9ih of April and ter- 
minated on the 18th. On that day General Va- 
laze proposed his amendment dsclaring that "the 
payments in execution of the present law cannot be 
made until after the French Government shall 
have received satisfactory explanations, with re- 
gard to the message of the President of the Uni- 
ted States, dated the 2d December, 1834." 

The Duke de Broglie, the Minister of Foreig-n 
Afiairs, accepted this amendment. I shall read his 
remarks on this occasion. He says: " The inten- 
tion of the Government has always bven conforma- 
ble with the detire expressed by the author of 
the amendment which is now before the Chamber, 
f^eat agitation,J the Government has always 
meant that diplomatic relations should not be re- 
newed with the Government of the United States 
until it hud received satisfactory explanations. 
The Government, therefore, dots not repulse the 
amendment itself." After this, on the same day. 



fhe French Ministry having manifested their ! the bill passed the Chamber by a vote of 289 to 



sensibility to the supposed insult, by recalling Mr. 
Serrurier, proceeded Immediately to present the 
bill for the execution of the trenty to the Cham- 
bers. Tn presenting it on the 15th January, Mr, 
Humann, the Mini.ster of Finance, addressed the 



137. 

Well might the Chamber be agitated at such 
an aimuiiciation from the Minister of Foreign Af- 
fairs. Why this sudden change in the policy of 
the French Govrnment? The answer is plain. 



Chamber. His speech contains the views then | Congiess ha*l adjourned on the 4th of Maich, 
entertained by the French cabinet. 1 shall read j without munifesting by their notions, any dispasi- 
an extract from it. He ssys: . . ^ .-.. ^ r.u_ ^-„ 



Ition to make the fulfilment of the treaty a serious 




the 

the . „ ._ . 

mistaken as to the laws of oar country, we will j coast of the United States from Maine to Geor- 
not fall into U»e same error with regard to the in- j pm, in a defenceless comlition. The ettect upon 
Blitutions of the United States. Now, t)»e spirit and ! Uie French Chamber and the French people was 
letter of those institutions authorise us to rcgnrd j such as might have been anticipated. To prove 
the documt-nt above named, [the mc«st»ge,l as the this, 1 diall read an extract from a speech deliver- 
expre«Hon of an opinion merely personal, so long! ed by Mr. Bignon, one of tlie Deputies, on the 
as that opiiuon has not received the .sanction of j lOth April. 1 s^dect this from many others be- 
the oth<r two branches of the American Govern- cause it contains nothing which can be offensive to 
mcnt. The message is a Government act, which ' any Senator. It will be recollecte*i that Mr. Big- 
ifl still incomplete, and should not lead to any of; non U the {gentleman who h-id been more ii.s'ru- 
those detcrmination-s, whicli France i» in the habit ■ mental in defeating the bill at thu previous ses-;ion 
of taking in reply to a threat or an insult." than any otiier member. 

Tlie French Ministrj-.attbattinBC, considered the 1 ••President Jackson's message has ftston»»hed 
President's Message, merely his pcrs.onaJact,until it them, (ihe Americans) " well as us; they have 
should receive tlie sanction of Congress. I'hey, ; seen themselves thrown by it into a very hazard- 
then, had not drfamt of requiring an explanation ous situation. What have they done' They are 
of it, as the only condition on wluch they would | too circumspect and clear-headed to express, by 
paythemonev. This was an after Uiought. The j «n officiil determination, their disapprov-al of an 
bill presented' by Mr. Humann merely prescribed, ! act which, in reality, has not received their assent, 
that the payments should not be made, "until it i Same of thera, for instance Mr. Adams, in the 
shall have been ascertained that the (;ovcrnment i House of Representatives, may indeed, from a 
of the United States has done nothing to injure 1 politic patriotism, have eren eulogized the Presi. 
the interests of France." This bill was immedi- dent's energy, and obtained from the^ C^niber 
ately referred to a committee, of wiiich Mr. Du- " * 

inon was the Chairman. On the 28th of March, 
he reported it to the Chamber, witli a provision, 
that tile money should not be paid, if the Govern- 
ment of the United States shull have done any 
thing " contrary to the dignity and the interests of 
Tranee." Still wc hear nothing of an explana 



the expression that the treaty of 1831 must be 
complied with; but at a preceding setting the 
-ame member took p»ins to declare that he was 
not the defender of a system of war; he proclaim- 
ed «loud that tlie resolution adopted by the Sen- 
ate was an expedient suggeste<l by prudence, and 
he thought the Hou«c of Representatives should 



18 



pursue the same course. Gentlemen, the Ameri- 
can Legislature had to resort to expedients to get 
out of the embarrassing dilemma in which the 
President's message had placed them; and they 
acted wisely." 

From the conduct ofCongress, the French Cham- 
bers were under the impression that the people of 
the United States wovild not adopt any energetic 
measures to compel the fulfilment of the treaty. 
They had no idea that the naiion would sustain the 
President in his efforts. They had reason to believe 
that he was left almost alone. They appear erer 
since to have acted under this delusion. Accord- 
ing to the impression of Mr. Bignon, the nation 
was astounded at President Jackson's message. 
This is the true reason why the Ministry accepted 
the amendment tequiring President Jackson to 
make an explanation. 

The best mode of obtaining justice from the 
powerful as well as from the weak — the best mode 
of elevating this nation to the lofty position she is 
destined to occupy among the nations of the 
earth — the best mode of preventing war and pre- 
serving peace, is to stand up firmly for our rights. 
The a:*sertion of these rights, not by threats, but 
boldly, manfully and frankly, is tlie surest method 
of obtaining justice and respect from other na- 
tions. 

At so early ft day as the 23th of January, Mr. Li- 
vingston had addressed .\ note to the Duke deBrog- 
lie, distinctly disavowing any intention, on the part 
of the Presidenf, by his message, to intimidate 
France, or to charge the French Government with 
bad faith On the 25th of April, in another letter 
to the Duke, he communicated to him the Presi- 
dent's official approbation of his former note. In 
this last li-tter, he reiter.tes his explanation.?, and 
assures the Duke, that whilst the President intend- 
ed to use no menace, nor to charge any breach of 
faith against the King's Government, he never 
could and never would make an explanation of 
his message, on the demand of a Foreign Govern- 
ment. 1 his letter weuld, of itself, be suflScient to 
give its s-uthor a high rank not only among the di- 
plomatists, but the .stitesmen of his country. The 

, sentimi nts it contains were unanimously approved 
by t'le American people. Allhuugh it wasrccJvtd 
by the Duke before the bill had been acted upon 
by the Cliamber of Peers, it produced no effect 
upon the French Ministry. The bill was finally 
p»ssed and obtained the sanction of the King, in a 
form requiring the President to explain his mes- 
sage before the money could be paid. 

Ths slate of facts distinctly raises the import- 
ant question, whether a President of the United 
States can be questioned by aJ'oreign Government 
for any thing contained in a message to Congress. 
The princlpie that he cmnot, has already been 
firmly estabHshed by the practice of our Govern- 
ment. F..ven in our intercourse with France, in 

■ former times, t!ie question has bten settled. This 
principle resul's frum the very nauire of our insti- 
tutions. It must ever be maintained invioliite. 
Reverse it, and you destroy the hu-'t-pendent exist- 
tence of this liepublic, so far as its intercourse 
with Foreign Nations is concerned. 

The constliutiwn requires, that the President o 
the United States "siiall, from time to time, give 



to the Congress information of the state of the 
Union, and recommend to their consideration 
such measilres as he shall judge necessary and ex- 
pedient." This information is intended not only 
for the use ofCongress, but of the people. They 
are the source of all power, and from their im- 
pulse all legitimate legislation must proceed. 
Both Congress and the people must be informed of 
the state of our foreign relations by the Executive, 
If the President cannot speak freely to them upon 
this subject; if he cannot give them all the in- 
formation which maybe necessary to enable them 
to act, except under the penalty of often(^ing a 
foreign Government, the Constitution of the 
United States, to this extent, becomes a dead let- 
ter. The maintenance of this principle is an in- 
dispensable condition of our existence, under the 
present form of Government. 

If we ar« engaged in any controversy with a 
foreign nation, it is not only the right, biu it is 
the imperative duty of the President, to communi- 
cate the facts to Congress, however much they 
may operate against that nation. Can we then, for 
a single moment, permit a foreign Governraeat to 
demand an apology from the President for per- 
forming one of his highest duties t© the people of 
the United States? 

Let us put an extreme case. Suppose the Pre- 
sident, after giving a history of our wrongs to 
Congress, recommends not merely a resort to re- 
prisals, but to war, against another nation. Shall 
this nation, which has inflicted u.ioii us injury 
after injury, be permitted to cliange her position, 
to cancel all our claims for justice, and to insist 
thiit we have become the aggressoi-s, because a 
resort to wms has been recommended* I feel the 
most perfect confidence, that not a single Senator 
will ever consent to > ield this position tw France or 
1 to any other nation. I need not labor this ques- 
tion. The subject has been placed in the clear- 
est and strongest light by Mr. Livingston, in his 
letter to the Duke de Broglie of the 25th of April. 

If any possible exception to the rule could be 
tolerated, surely this would not present the case. 
The Duke de Brog^lie himself, in his letter to Mr. 
Pa,?eoT, is constrained to admit, th.it there is not a 
singk- offensive sentence re-pecting France in the 
message; but yet he complains of the gentral ef- 
fect of the whole. 

With a full knowledge then that the President 
could not, would not, dare not explain his mv-.s- 
sage, on the demand of any Foreign Government, 
the Duke de Broglie addresses his famous letter 
to the Charge de Afiaires of France, wt Wa.shing- 
ton. It bears date at Paris, on the 17lii June, 
18.35. Before I proceed to make any remarks 
upon this letter, I wish to biing its ch.iracter dis- 
tinctly into the view of the SefU'te. It commen- 
ces by declaring, in oppo.Vition to the pi-incipie 
that the President of tlie Uniccd States cannot be 
called upon bv a foreign <M>vernment to make 
explanations of a message to Congre.s^; that, "by 
virtue of a clause insetted in tlit- articie first, by 
the ChamberofDeputiei--, the French Gov rnment 
must defer making the payaients agreed upon, 
until thai of f he Untted Slates ahull hao- ixplaimd 
the true meanin3;,(indreMl purport of diver." passa- 
ges inserfid bij the President oj iht Uitiun in hu 



19 



message at Ihc opcnivg of the last session of Con- 
greas, anH at which alt Fratice, at ihc first aspect, was 
justly offended " 

It proceeds still further, an! nnnoiinces that, 
"the Governmtnt, Ijivinjc dscovered nothing- in 
that clause at variance witii its own sf ntiments, or 
the coui-se it had intended to pursue, tiie project 
of law thus amended on the 18th April, by tlie 
Chamber of Deputies, was carried on the 27th, to 
the Cl>Hnil)er of Peers." 

The Duke, after havin(^ thus distinctly stated,ihat 
an explanation of the message was required as a 
condition of the payment of the money, and after 
presenting a liistorlcal sketch of the controversy, 
thrn controverts, it considerable length, the posi- 
tion which had been maintained by Mr. I.ivinu'ston, 
that the President could not b^" questioned by a 
Fore gn Government for anything' contained in a 
messig-e to Congress. He afterwards asserts, in 
the broades* terms, that the explanations which 
had been voluntarily made by Mr. Living-ston, and 
sanctioned by the President, were not sufficient. 

In suggesting what would satisfy France, he 
&ays, "we do not here contend about this or tha'^^ 
phrase, this or that ullcgation, this or that expres- 
sion; we c- mend about the intention itself, which 
has dictated that part of the messnge." And 
again, speaking of Mr. I/uingston's letters of the 
29th January, and 25'h April, he adds: 

"You will easily 'conceive, sir, and the Cabinet 
of Washington will, we think, nnderstiand it also, 
that such phrases incidentally inserted in docu- 
mf nts, the j)urport «nd tenor of which are purely 
polem cal, surrounded, in some measure, by de- 
tails of a controversy, which is besides not always 
free from bitterness, cannot dispel sufficiently 
the iniprts<ion produced by the perusal of the 
message, nor Ntrike the mind rw would the same 
idea txpm^id in terms single, positive, direct, and 
unaccoinpnnied bjj any recrimination concerning 
facts or incidents no longer of any importance. 
Sucli is the motive which, among many others, has 
placed the French Government in the impossi- 
bility of acce<ling to the wisli expressed by Mr. 
Livingston towards the cmclusion of his note wf 
the 29th (.f .\pril by declaring (to the Chamber 
of Peers probably) that previous explanations 
gifenby tlie mini-ster of the United States and sub- 
sequently approved by the President, had satisfied 
it." 

After having thus announced the kind of expla- 
nat on which would be expected, he states, that 
tlie French (iovernment **ii pausing then for the 
present, und waiting for tiie fulfilment of those 
engagements to be claimed, (the engagements of 
the treaty) and expecting those to be claimed 
in terms CO, liittent with the regard due to it, it is 
not afraid of being accused, nor France, which it 
represents, of being accused of appreciating na- 
tional honor by any number of million'^, which it 
cotdd withhold as a compensation for any injury 
offered to it." The letter concludes by ;iutho- 
rizing Mr. Pagcot to read it to Mr. Forsyth, and 
if he be desirous, to let him take a copy of it. 

It is impossible to peruse this letter, able and 
ingenious as it i.s, without at once perceiving, 
that it asks what the President can never grant, 
without violating the principle that France lias no 

ght to demand an explanation of his message. 



On the 11th of September, Mr. Pageot, the 
French Charge d'Affaires, called at the Depart- 
ment of State and read this dtspatch to Mr. For- 
syth. The latter did not thir.k proper to .isk a co- 
py of it; an<l for this, he has been loudly condemn- 
ed. In my judgment, his conduct was perfectly 
correct. 

No objection can be made to this indirect mode 
of communication with the Government of the 
(,'nited States adopted by the Duke. It is .sanc- 
tioned by diplomatic usage. The rules, however, 
which govern it, are cUarly deducible from its 
very nature. It is a mere diplomatic feeler 
thrown out to ascertain the views of another 
Government. The Duke himself justly observes 
tliat its object is *' to avoid the irritation which 
might involui.tarily arise from an exchange of con- 
tradictory notes in a direct controversy." 

Had Mr. Forsyth asked wnd received ft cony of this 
desp.-itch, he must have given it an answer. Re- 
spect for the source from which it proceeded 
would have demanded th's ut his hand?. If this 
answer could have been nothing but a direct refu- 
sal to comply with the suggestions of the French 
Government, then he was correct in not rofiuesl- 
ing h ave to take a copy of it. Why was this the 
case? Because it would jjave added to the diffi- 
culties of the question already suflici-ntly nume- 
rous, and would have involved him in a direct con- 
troversy, which it is the very object of this mode 
of communication to prevent. This is the reason 
why it was left by the despatch i'.self, within his 
own option whetht r to request a copy or n»t; and 
his refusal to make this request ought to have 
given no offence to the French Government. 

Now, iir, what answer could he have given to 
this commuirication, but a direct refusal.^ Had 
not the Duke been fully apprised before he wrote 
this despatch, that it could receive no other an- 
swer? It required explanations as a condition of 
the payment of the money, which he had been in- 
formed the Piesident could never make. On this 
ground, then, and for the very purpo.se of avoiding 
controversy, the conduct of .Mr. Porsyth was cor 
rec*. 

But there is another reason to justify his con- 
duct, which, I think, must cany conviction to 
every mind. The President proposed, in his an- 
nual message, voluntarily to declare, that he had 
never intended to menace France, or to impeach 
the faith of the French Government. This he has 
since done in the strongest terms. As ofli'ence 
w.as taken by the French Government at the lan- 
guage of a former message, it was believed that 
such a declaration in a subsequent message would 
be, as it ought to be, entirely satisfactory to 
France. Had Mr. Forsyth taken a copy of this 
despatch, and placed it among the archives of the 
Government, how could the Pi'esident have made, 
consistently with his princi])les, the disclaimer 
which he has done* A demand for an explana- 
♦ion would thus have been interposed by a foreign 
Government, which would have compelled 
him to remain silent. The refusal of Mr. 
Forsyth to ask a copy of the dcspate.h, left the con- 
trover.sy in its old condition; and, so far as our 
Government was concerned, left this letter from 
the Duke de Broglie to Mr. Pageot as if it never 
had been written. The President, therefore, re- 



20 



mained at perfect liberty to isay what he thought 
proper in his inessHge. 

If this letter had proposed any reasonable terms 
of reconciling- our difficulties with France — if il 
had laid any foundation on which a ratio'^al hope 
might have rested that It would become the means 
of producing a result so desirable, it would have 
been the duty of Mr. Forsyth to request a copy. 
Upon much reflection, however, I must declare 
that I cannot imagine what good could have result- 
ed from it in wny contingency; and it might have 
done much evil. Had it prevented the President 
from speaking- as he has done in his last message 
concerning France, it might have involved the 
CGuntr in a much more serious misunderstanding 
with that Power than existed at the present mo- 
ment. 

I should be glad to say no more of this de- 
spatch, if I could do so consistently with a sense of 
duty. Mr. Pageot did not rest satisfies with Mr. 
Forsyth's omission to request a copy of it, as he 
ought to have done. He deemed it proper to at- 
tempt to force mai upon nun whicli the desp-atch 
iti-elf h:id iefi- entii-eiy to his own discretion. Ac- 
coi-dint;l}-, on the 1st of December last, he enclosed 
him a copy. Cm the third, Mr. Forsyth returned 
It with a polite refus.il. Qn the fifth, Mr. Pageot 
again addressed Mr. Forsyth, and avowed that hi.' 
intention in communicating the document, "was 
to make known the real disposition of my Govern- 
ment to the President of the United States, and 
through hint to Congress and ihe American Peo- 
ple." Thus it is manifest, that his purpose was to 
make the President the instrument by which he 
might appeal to the American People agairist the 
American Government. After he had failed in 
this effort, what is his next resort? He publishes 
this despatch to the people of the United States 
through the medium of our public journals. I 
now hoiil in my hand the number of the Courier 
des Eta's Unis of the 20ih of January, a journal 
published in New York, which contains the ori- 
ginal despatch in the French language. Tn a 
subsequent number of tl»e same journal, of tlie 
24lh January, there is an editorial article on the 
subject of the President's special message to Con- 
gress, and of this despatch, of a part of which I 
shall give my own translation. It is as follows.- 

" Our last number contained the despatch of M. 
the Dukede P.roglie to the Charge d'Affaiies of 
France at Washington,concerning which the Senate 
had demanded such explanations as were in the 
povf er of the F>xecutive. On the same day, the late 
message of the President of the United States, 
which had been expected with so much impa- 
tience and anxiety, arrived at New York. To 
this document are annexed many letters of the 
Duke de Brog-lie, of Mr. Forsyth, and of Mr. Pa- 
geot, which will be read with great interest. We 
give a simple analysis of the least important, and 
an exrtd copy of those which havt been written 
originalli/ in French. 

" The public attention was first occupied wifli 
this letter uf the Minister of Foreig-n Affair^, 
which was known here some hours before the 
Message of the President of the United States; 
and if some journals of the Government have found 
this publication unseasonable, rttade bi/ the Les^a- 
tion of France according to the orders which it had 



received, nobody, at least, has been able to deny 
the talent, the moderation, and the force of rea- 
soning which have presided at its preparation " 

By whom was the Legation of France ordered 
to publish this despatch? Who alone had the 
power of issuing such an order? The French 
Government. Against this positive language, I 
can still scarcely believe that the Duke de Broglle 
has given an order so highly reprehensible. 

The publication of this despatch was an outrage 
upon all diplomatic usage. It ought to have 
been intended »s the harbinger of peace, and not 
of renewed controversy. From its very nature it 
was secret and confidential. If not received, it 
ought to have been as if it never had existed. 
Upon any other principle, it would aggravate the 
controversy which such communications are al- 
ways intended to prevent. It has now been 
diverted fron» its natural purpose by the French 
Legation, and has been made the subject of an ap- 
peal by France to the American people against 
their own Government. It has thus greatly in- 
creased the difficulties between the two countries. 
It has proclaimed to the world that France re- 
quires, from the President of the United States, 
an apnlogy of his message as an indispensable 
condition of the execution of our treaty. It has, 
therefore, rendered it much more difficult for her 
to retract. 

The true meaning of this despatch is now ren- 
dered manifest to the most sceptical. The Duke 
de Rroglie, in his interview with Mr. Barton, on 
the 12th October last, has placed his own con- 
struction upon it. The apology which he then 
required from the President, contains his own 
oommentary upon this despatch. I need n"t read 
the history of that interview to the Senate, to 
prove that I am correct in this assertion. It must 
be fresh in the recollection of every Senator. 

Considered as an appeal to the American peo- 
ple Kgainst their own Government, the publication 
of this despatch deserves still more serious con- 
sideration. Foreign influence, in ail ages, h.is been 
the bane of republics. It has destroyed nearly all 
of them which have ever existed. We ougtit to 
resist its approsches on every occasion. In the 
very infancy of our existence as a nation, a simi- 
lar attempt was made by France. It was then 
repulsed as became a nation of freemen. The 
present attempt will have the same effect on the 
American people. It will render them still more 
firm and still more united in the cause of their 
country. 

Of Mr. Barton's recall, I need say but htile. It 
was the direct consequence of the refus;d of 
France to execute the treaty, without an apology 
from the President of his message. 

Diplomatic relations between the two countries- 
had been first interrupted by France. On this sub, 
ject hear what the Count de Uigny s*id in his expose 
Ve:ul to the Chamber of Peers, on the 27t\\ April 
last, on presenting the bill for the execution oi our 
treaty. 1 give my^ own translation: 

"You know^ the measure which the Govern- 
metit of the King adopted at the very instant 
when the message, ])resentcd by the President of 
the Union, at the opening of the la-it Congress, 
arrived in Europe. You know that since that 
time, a similar measure has been adopted by Pre- 



81 



rident Jackson hinaself. The two ministers, ac- 
credited near the two Governments, are recipro- 
cally recalled; the effect of this double recall is at 
this moment, if not to interrupt, in all respects, the 
diplomatic communications between the two States, 
at least to interrupt them in wiiat regards the treaty 
of the 4lh July. If these relations ought to be 
renewed, and we doubt not that they ought, it is 
not for us hereafter to take the initiative-" 

On the 5th of June, tiie President had officially 
sanctioned the explanations which had been made 
to the French Government by Mr. Livingston, in 
bis letter of the 25thof April, ashe had previously 
sanctioned those which had been made by the same 
gentleman, in his note of the 29th of January 
These were considered by the President, amply 
sufficient to satisfy the swsceptible feelings of 
France. In order to give them full time to pro 
duce their effect, and to aff'ord the French Minis 
try an ample opportunity for reflection, he delay- 
ed sending any orders to demand the money se 
cured by the treaty, until the middle of Septem 
ber. On the 14th of that month, Mr. Barton was 
instructed to call upon the Duke de Broglie, and 
request to be informed, what were the intentions 
of the French Government, in relation to the pay- 
ment of tlie money secured by the treaty. He 
executed these instructions on the 20th of October. 
The special message has commimicated to us the 
result. " VVc will pay the money," says the Duke 
de Broglie, "when ihe Government of the Unitfd 
State.'! is ready on its part, to drclare to tn; by 
addressing its claim to us officially in writing, 
that it relets the misunderstanding which has 
arisen between the two countries; that this misun- 
derntanding is founded on a mistake; that it never 
entered into its intention to call in question the good 
faith of the French Gmienimenf, nor to take a me- 
nacing attitude towards France;" and he adds, 
"if the Government of tlte United States does not 
give this assurance, we shall be obliged to think 
that this misunderstanding is not the result of an 
error." 

Is there any American so utterly lost to those 
generous feelings, which love of country should 
inspire, as to purchase five millions with the loss 
of national honor' Who, for these or any num- 
ber of millions, would see the venerable man, 
now at the head of our Government, l)owing at 
the footstool of tiie throne of Louis Phillippe, and 
iike a child, prepared to s.iy its lesson, repeating 
this degrnding apolog_\ ? First, perish the five mil- 
lions; — perish a thousand times the amount. The 
man, whose bosom has been so often bared in the 
defence of his country, will never submit to such 
degrading terms. Ilis motto has always been, 
death before dishonor. 

Why then, it may be asked, have I expressed a 
hope, a belief) that tliis unfortunate controversy 
will be amicably terminaied, when the two nations 
are now directly at issue? I will tell you why. 
This has been called a mere question of etiquette; 
and such it is, so far as France is concerned. She 
has already received every explanation which the 
most jealous susceptibility ought to demand. 
These have been voluntarily tendered to her. 



Since the date of the Duke de Broglie's letter 



to Mr. Pageot of the 17th June, wc have receivetl 
from the President of the United Slates, his gcner- 
al message at the commencement of the session, 
and his special message on French affairs. Both 
these documents disclaim, in the strongest terms, 
any intentio.n to menace France, or to impute ba<l 
faith to the French Government, by the message 
of December, 1834. Viewing the subject in this 
light; considering that at the interview with Mr. 
Barton, the Duke could not have anticipated what 
would be the tone of these documents, I now en- 
tertain a strong hope that the French Government 
have already reconsidered their determination. If 
a mediation has been proposed and accepted, I 
cannot entertain a doubt as to what will be tlie 
opinion of the mediator. He ought to say to 
France, you have already received all the explan- 
ations, and these have been vohmtarilv accorded, 
which the United States can make, without na- 
tional degradation. With these you ought to be 
satisfied. With you, it is a mere question of eti- 
quette. All the disclaimers which you ought to 
desire, have already been miide by the Pn^si lent 
of the United States. The only (luestion with 
you now, is not one of substance, but merely 
whether th»se explanations are in proper form. 
But in regard to the United States, the question is 
far different. What is with you mere etiquette, 
is a question of life and death to them. Let the 
President of the United States m^ki- the apology 
which you have dictated, — let him once admit tue 
right of a Foreign (iovernment to question hi 
messages to Congress, and to demand explanations 
of any langusige at which they may choose to take 
offence, and their independent existence :is a Go- 
vernment, to that extent, is >'irtually destroyed. 

We must remember that France may yield with 
honor; ive never can, without disgrace. Will she 
yield' That is the question. I confess I should 
have entertained a stronger belief that she would, 
had she not published the Duke's letter to Mr. 
Pageot as an appeal lo the American people. She 
must still believe that the people of this country 
are divided in opinion in regard to the firm main- 
tenmce of their rights. In this she will find her- 
self entirely mistaken. But should Congress, at 
the present session, refuse to sustain the President 
by adopting measures of defence; should tiie pre- 
cedent of the last session be followed for the pres- 
ent year, then I shall entertain the most gloomy 
forebodings. The Father of his country has in- 
formed us that the best mode of preserving 
peace is to be prepared for war. 1 firmly believe, 
therefore, that a unanimous vote of the Senate in 
favor of the resolutions now before them, to follow 
to Kurope the acceptance of the mediation, would, 
almost to acertainty, render it successful. It would 
be an act of the soundest policy as well as of ^e 
highest patriotism. It would prove, not that we 
intend to menace France, because such an attempt 
would be ridiculous; but that the American peo- 
ple are unanimous in the assertion of their rights, 
and have resolved to prepare for the worst. — 
A Frtnch fleet is now hovering upon our coasts; 
and sIihII we iit still, with an overflowing Treasu- 
ry, and leave our country defenceless' This will 
never be said with truth of the American Con- 
gress. 



22 

Magistrate,— we may appeal to Heaven for the I nations. 



